Ring of Gyges

[endersgone]

"According to the legend, Gyges of Lydia was a shepherd in the service of King Candaules of Lydia. After an earthquake, a cave was revealed in a mountainside where Gyges was feeding his flock. Entering the cave, Gyges discovered that it was in fact a tomb with a bronze horse containing a corpse, larger than that of a man, who wore a golden ring, which Gyges pocketed. He discovered that the ring gave him the power to become invisible by adjusting it."

The dilemma presented by Plato in this story is one having to do with inherent human morality (or amorality) - He argues that we would all become amoral (revert to our "true nature") if we were given this power/artifact - in essence we are amoral beings without societal constraints/restrictions.

What would you do if you came across such a ring? Can you say with certainty that you'd continue your life as a "moral" human being? If not, what advantages would you seek gain over others... what boundary would you not cross?

 

[Radiantshadow]

Tolkien did a decent job with this:

[video=youtube;aFW6FGV_tls]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFW6FGV_tls[/video]


I would try to resist the temptation of possibility and throw it away. Great consolidated power begins and ends with the wielder, not the collective.

My thoughts are a little scattered from a long day, but here they are:

I question the relevance of humans being inherently amoral and pragmatic. Whether we are or are not basically moral does not change that we create morals anyway to enjoy life, and, even with all the woes of the world, they work (imperfectly, but they work). Lamenting failed expectations is a waste of time; in my opinion, there is more importance, hope, and value in creating such organization to begin with - the act has its' own infinite, ongoing potential from the many things it has created.

To sum: we're still here.

 

[endersgone]

"Lamenting failed expectations is a waste of time; in my opinion, there is more importance, hope, and value in creating such organization to begin with - the act has its' own infinite, ongoing potential from the many things it has created."

I expect you're right in that regard, but I'm interested in lots of "useless" topics and questions. I just enjoy seeing/trying to understand different perspectives on moral/philosophical questions... but I can understand why you might see this as a waste of time.

 

[Kgal]

I cannot imagine a use for a ring that made me invisible.
Thinking of a potential noble cause: Even if I used it to spy on the extremely powerful and wealthy who were plotting to rule the world - how would I prove it? If I did prove it - they'd just kill me - and take the ring.
If I used it to sneak my way into a bank and steal money - wouldn't it be traced?
If I used it to steal stuff - I'd get bored as I'm not really into having a lot of stuff. I'd just sell the stuff for money. And eventually they'd catch me because now there are chips imbedded into every thing made so it can be tracked all over the globe. Right?

No....I need money right now. I'd have the ring melted down for the gold and exchange that for money to pay off my car.

There is much research to show we are compassionate at heart and cooperation is how we survived in a harsh world before the last 3000 years. The idea we would all revert to amoral behavior is probably false.

Recently, however, a team of scientists at UC Santa Barbara conducted a series of computer simulations designed to test whether it was really true that evolution would select against generosity in situations where there is no future payoff. Their work surprisingly shows that generosity -- acting to help others in the absence of foreseeable gains -- emerges naturally from the evolution of cooperation. This means that human generosity is likely to rest on more than social pressure, and is instead built in to human nature.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110725162523.htm

 

[Radiantshadow]

I think there has been a misunderstanding.

I do not consider philosophy useless in the slightest, the pursuit of truth and knowledge is a fulfilling and beautiful lifestyle. However, I have read of and seen many get hung up on the idea that humans might be amoral and then stop engaging life because of a subsequent defeatist/nihilist worldview. That - an unwillingness to set aside one's expectations and adapt more complete worldviews in light of the truth, however harsh it may seem - is what I find a waste of time and of one's potential. (Of course, I'm hardly saying my view is right; I haven't done the slightest bit of research into human kindness and cruelty.) My comment was not aimed at you, but this issue in general...I probably should have clarified this. Let there be a pox on exhaustion!

 

[Radiantshadow]

There is much research to show we are compassionate at heart and cooperation is how we survived in a harsh world before the last 3000 years. The idea we would all revert to amoral behavior is probably false.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110725162523.htm

^.^ I like this, it gives me more hope for humans and adds credence to some thoughts I've had. Thank you for posting this, @Kgal .

Edit: Sorry for the double-post, didn't see Kgal's response.

 

[endersgone]

I think there has been a misunderstanding.

I do not consider philosophy useless in the slightest, the pursuit of truth and knowledge is a fulfilling and beautiful lifestyle. However, I have read of and seen many get hung up on the idea that humans might be amoral and then stop engaging life because of a subsequent defeatist/nihilist worldview. That - an unwillingness to set aside or adapt one's expectations in light of the truth, however harsh it may seem - is what I find a waste of time and of one's potential. My comment was not aimed at you, but this issue in general...I probably should have clarified this. Let there be a pox on exhaustion!

Oh, gotcha, then I completely agree : )

I'm not a big fan of nihilism personally, not a lot of room for hope or potential there...

 

[#@&5&49]

"According to the legend, Gyges of Lydia was a shepherd in the service of King Candaules of Lydia. After an earthquake, a cave was revealed in a mountainside where Gyges was feeding his flock. Entering the cave, Gyges discovered that it was in fact a tomb with a bronze horse containing a corpse, larger than that of a man, who wore a golden ring, which Gyges pocketed. He discovered that the ring gave him the power to become invisible by adjusting it."

The dilemma presented by Plato in this story is one having to do with inherent human morality (or amorality) - He argues that we would all become amoral (revert to our "true nature") if we were given this power/artifact - in essence we are amoral beings without societal constraints/restrictions.

What would you do if you came across such a ring? Can you say with certainty that you'd continue your life as a "moral" human being? If not, what advantages would you seek gain over others... what boundary would you not cross?

This reminds me of invisible girl from the "Fantastic Four" super hero comics. I would totally try to use that power to help human kind. How? I have no idea. I would have to enlist the help of others like human torch, thing, and mister fantastic, and we can't forget the SILVER SURFER!! YAY.

I spend entirely too much time around kids. :becky:

 

[muir]

I think many members of elites throughout history have enjoyed Plato's belief that the ideal society would be ruled by an elite. Plato argued for a ruling class of 'philosopher kings' but who is going to decide who these philosopher kings are?

What we now have is an elite of bankers who ally themselves with any academics/scientists who support them and they see themselves as the ideal elite to rule over society

They don't believe that elected politicians are the correct people to rule and they don't believe in people power

I think that Neo-platonism has had a big influence on christianity, secret societies and on many thinkers in general throughout the ages

Although i can connect with spiritual aspects of their thinking i do not agree with Plato's idea that we should be ruled by an elite

I also believe that the economic situation we are living through and many of the changes we are seeing to our society and laws are related to the belief of the elite that they should rule over us and don't need our opinion on matters and that our society is being increasingly shaped by their world view. Their belief in their superiority and right to rule is nurtered in them in elite educational establishments and within closed door clubs.

Some people call this sort of thing 'conspiracy theory' yet they will talk about elites thoughout history ruling over people. For example kings, queens, emporers and empresses etc that have weilded great power over societies through their followers. These elites of 'nobility' have an agreement with their ruler to rule over the larger mass of the population together. This is a conspiracy and not a theory. Magna Carta was an attempt by the nobility to limit the power of the King. In time a new merchant class elite rose up which challenged the aristocracy, an elite of wealth, which grew richer from the slave trade, cotton and sugar and from financing wars between countries.

People willingly accept these things when they read them in history books so why do people suppose that things are any different now? Is it because they have a vote? Do they now think that they have more power these days then their ancestors because they have a 'democratic vote' every five years? The only reason people became more enfranchised was because the elites were shit scared by generations of men returning from fighting world wars, who were trained soldiers and could easily overthrow the elite if they were not given a better quality of life after their sacrifice; women also were newly empowered after proving that they could do mens jobs whilst the men were away fighting. Any gains at this time were merely temporary concessions which the elites have always wanted to peel back.

How many people still believe that politicians represent their best interests rather than the interests of the bankers or the corporations? Especially as they watch more and more tax cuts being declared for the top earners! (income tax was created for a reason!)

The reality is that the politicians are part of the modern elite, which now is a corporate/financial elite.

The big question, imo, isn't what would we as individuals do with total power, but should we be allowing our own financial/corporate elites to control our governments in the here and now or should everyone have more say over the running of their own lives and communities?

If people believe that they should have more say over their own lives then they need to think past the capitalistic or state socialistic ideas which the elites have fostered in the public mind in order to make it more easy to control and start believing in their own right to participate in the decision making processes of society.....a bigger involvment than voting in a sham election every 5 years where they can choose between different factions of the elite!

 

[Quiet]

I think Plato is a bit of a dick that didnt give people enough credit. In his defense though, he did live in a very class divided, aristocratic society, a very long time ago.

I think this is a great and fun question though, and I put it to a group of friends that I had over. The results were absolutely hilarious and some important and profound issues were raised.

Everone agreed that it would be unfair for any indiviual to have invisibility when others dont. There is probaby a really good reason why humans cant become invisible.

The important questions that need to be answered:
Would it be just your body or your clothes as well that would become invisibe? If it was just your body then having fun with invisibility would be a lot more compliacted, and it would be a lot harder to get up to mischief, especaily in colder climates.

Would bodily fluids also become invisible- snot, blood, pee, shit? Or would they still be invisible? Either way could be hilarious. How funny would it be if you got a cold? If invisible shit is possible though then there are many scenarios where one could have fun with that. Probably a great way to bring down corrupt world leaders if they constantly step into invisible shit.

We also realised that getting up to mischief would only be fun in a country where guns are prohibited, not in a place where people shoot whenever they freak out. Otherwise things like driving a car invisible would be no fun when people get concerned and start shooting.

We discussed using invisibility to do dodgy things- like rob a bank etc but we kept coming up with problems. How would you hide the money? If only your body was invisible you'd have to stuff everything in your mouth- and thats not comfortable. Even in a fight situation, invisibility may not be an advantage if people can still hear you, and ofcourse theres the matter of guns again.

Also, walking through a crowded street would be pretty annoying. People run into you when they cant see you. And what if a bird shat on you? Of if the street was very dusty?
Ofcourse you could use it to spy on people, but youd have to be very quiet. What if you had to laugh, or cough? And you'd still have to be wary of guard dogs. And theres no point really using it to perv on people because there is so much free stuff on the internet nowdays.

Basically the only way anyone could think if using this ring productively was for having fun pissing your friends off. Hiding things, farting and sneezing in elevators, moving random objects, sitting in someones chair etc. Even the most basic activities such as brushing your teeth could become funny. And creepy things like whistling or humming a tune an annoying tune.

Id definately keep the ring if I found it, atleast for a little while. I dont know how often Id use it, but Im sure it would be a good laugh