Snowflakes | Page 10 | INFJ Forum

Snowflakes

Are you a snowflake given this definition?

  • Yes, I am a snowflake

    Votes: 5 27.8%

  • No, I am not a snowflake

    Votes: 7 38.9%

  • I just love people, and prefer not to arbitrarily negatively label my fellow human beings

    Votes: 6 33.3%
  • Total voters
    18
Status
Not open for further replies.
If a tiger kills a man, is the tiger insane or is it the man that's crazy for messing with nature, even if he simply needed to survive. Or is nature the crazy motherfucker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow, Reason, Happy Phantom and 1 other person
Emanuel Goldstein said:
Jeez, this thread degraded into a feel good "your amazing" love fest after I left, good lord...

Okay... I was getting a little lazy with my arguments so in attempt to show my point. I propose a thought experiment in which you get to make decisions by replying to my post:

@Skarekrow @Icedream @Eventhorizon @Reason With Logic Filling @Lady Jolanda @all

You are in charge of a committee that will make policy on a technology that can remove an aspect from a person. I will list a series of persons and their issues and feeling and you will tell everyone what the policy will be for this new tech. I'll try not to leave any loopholes, but put you little monkeys in a locked room with 3 ways out and guaranteed you'll find a 4th... so here goes:

In all cases list the reasons why or why not you would remove an aspect of the persons personality. You "should" make decisions based on what is based on what best for the people but the final decision is yours.

*Your decision will be applied to all people of the same category!

1st guy is a gay necrophile serial killer likes the way he is and doesn't want his mind scrambled and doesn't want you to take away who he is. Do you take away his serial killerness and why?

2nd women is a serial killer as well, he wants the procedure and wants you to take away her serial killerness. Do you take it away or not and why?

3rd guy is gay, flamboyant, happy and quite comfortable with who he is, Do you remove that which makes him gay?

4th is male who identifies as female and is extremely unhappy with the situation has attempted suicide on multiple occasions (*experts say he will succeed in 6 months). Do you remove that part that makes her identify as female and why (or why not)?

5th is female who is also gay is and has depression, but believes its part of her and doesn't want changed.

have to go... try that and we'll discuss.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what they want if they are killing people. I'd change who the serial killers are - from being alive to being dead.

As for #3,4, and 5: these are all great examples of people who have problems they should try to work through, and if nature had created them as intended they will likely survive to procreate. If not then they will die off and we don't have to worry about it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Reason
Lady Jolanda said:
Well yes, you pretty much gave the definition of Extroverted Intuition here.


Interesting questions. I don't have time to get into all this in depth, or the playful back and forth you had with Reason, cause I have somewhere to be, but I'll get back to that later.

For now I'll throw some random half-baked thoughts your way regarding the above questions in regards to your hypothetical situation:
Does it matter? Isn't the end result the same?
What is the point of our legal system? Protection of society against criminal offenders, punitive treatment of said offender, discouraging future criminal behavior and, if possible, rehabilitation of offenders, yes?

You posed a hypothetical situation in which a device is invented that pretty much picks all of the boxes off in one big sweep. Yet we're not supposed to use it because... it goes against what the offender wants? Yes, I'm sure prison does too. Or the death penalty for that matter.
Click to expand...

I don't think I said it was a box or cutting into anyone's brain. I said it was an experimental treatment, never defined it because people would start to focus on it like now. I simply said essentially that the treatment would be used on all serial killers, and groups like that the same way, due to policy you created, not because of the machine.
It wasn't really about legal system, we are supposed to treat prisoner's humanely. So if a prisoner doesn't want to opt in to an experimental treatment, do really have to respect his right? They are limited but still in place. Prison is still the current, form of punishment. Other then that I'm not sure what your question was.
 
the said:
It doesn't matter what they want if they are killing people. I'd change who the serial killers are - from being alive to being dead.

As for #3,4, and 5: these are all great examples of people who have problems they should try to work through, and if nature had created them as intended they will likely survive to procreate. If not then they will die off and we don't have to worry about it.
Click to expand...

So, your saying serial killers have rights, but you would deny them their rights? What if after your change from alive to dead they turned out to be innocent... oops?

As for the other, fairly sound reasoning... cold, but sound...
 
has goldstein shut the fuck up yet?
 
Emanuel Goldstein said:
So, your saying serial killers have rights, but you would deny them their rights? What if after your change from alive to dead they turned out to be innocent... oops?

As for the other, fairly sound reasoning... cold, but sound...
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that I am 100% on board with the idea of people having rights. Like, society tolerates you as long as you are operating within the proper parameters. Some people are allowed to kill you (typically cops) and we all just accept it as "well he did his best in the line of duty." Does a serial killer have the right to live? Maybe? Has society given itself the right to kill a serial killer - definitely yes. Whose rights should be denied? Whose right will be denied?
 
the said:
I'm not sure that I am 100% on board with the idea of people having rights. Like, society tolerates you as long as you are operating within the proper parameters. Some people are allowed to kill you (typically cops) and we all just accept it as "well he did his best in the line of duty." Does a serial killer have the right to live? Maybe? Has society given itself the right to kill a serial killer - definitely yes. Whose rights should be denied? Whose right will be denied?
Click to expand...

I think I want to board your train of thought :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: the
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back