SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: one_less who wrote (78859)11/10/2003 4:29:20 AM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) of 82486
 
"I thought we were talking about sacrificing your own life for a noble cause. Thus the "noble cause" is the higher good."

There is nothing in the definition of "noble" or of "cause" which suggests anything about a higher good in any otherwordly sense. The highest good I know is serving the growth and happiness of humanity--in particular my own and those I value highest. But I was not speaking in terms of "higher good". You introduced it in a conditional clause and I questioned what it would mean to a humanist: "higher than what"--good to whom?

I also consider that preventing the suffering of other living creatures is doing good, but the highest good I know of is any good associated with humanity.

When one sacrifices, one does good to someone in some way--one serves the interests of another. Of course, I accept that this also serves ones own interests in that the happiness of whom one loves or values is an essential adjunct to ones own happiness.

I don't think I introduced the issue of "noble cause", but my small point to you was that the "nobility" of the sacrifice may be assessed somewhat by the value of what one gives up to serve the other. For instance, it is no big deal if I give someone I love all my water in the desert when I know there is a water hole 100 yards across the next sand dune. However, If It is all the water I will ever have, then it is more praiseworthy an act.

"My dilemma here is to understand how you can sacrifice your life and essence when the noble cause or your sacrifice is a non-issue for you on your death."

I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at but I will try to get near your dilemma:

Pretend a soldier sacrifices his life. If he feels compelled by God to fight a certain "enemy", then he might indeed be trying to serve the "good" of obedience to a God. A humanist soldier might be trying to preserve the freedom of people he loves. They are both willing to die in order that they "do good"--one to live again in some spiritual realm, and one to return to the universal energy.

The sacrifice is not a non-issue. In the case of the one the issue is the value of obedience to a God. In the case of the other the issue is the preservation of certain human values such as the safety and the way of life of his loved ones, his community, and his fellow citizens.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News