• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Ends justifying the means

Zombie_Babies

First Post
Legal equality is one thing. An assault is an assault, and that is good.

but, equality does not mean we are the same. (I wish modern game designers understood this) Males protect females. It is a fact we are animals. Evolution is a fact. So the fact is, we have a visceral reaction to protecting females that predates even the existence of homo sapien, much less modern concepts of equality.

It is completely possible, and normal, for a modern man, who loves women and supports gender equality, to have this deep feeling, even while culturally we are only just beginning to peel away thousands of years of oppression. I don't think the animal reaction is at odds with equality. This is far more complex than an all/nothing statement.

And indeed I think men's denial of their animal self was/is an unfortunate byproduct of the beginnings of the equality movement. And, to bring it around to topic, those means are not justified, because they did more damage, and caused more confusion.

Generally, I think the problem with means/ends is that evil means are used to justify evil ends which are whitewashed as good.
Neutral means to justify good ends tend not to bother me.

I'm sorry but all I can muster after reading this is a 'huh'? You do understand, I hope, that men are programmed to perform a function that differs greatly from 'protect' where women are concerned. That's what's natural for us. The world we live in today is constructed to be something very different.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Kramodlog

Naked and living in a barrel
we have a visceral reaction to protecting females
If this was really in our gene you wouldn't get domestic violence or rape. This is a myth, like maternal instincts.

The funny thing is, rape is probably in our genes.
 

Zombie_Babies

First Post
If this was really in our gene you wouldn't get domestic violence or rape. This is a myth, like maternal instincts.

The funny thing is, rape is probably in our genes.

I had always imagined Thog and Nug met gathering flowers. She peered under his massive brow into his dull eyes and shied away. He met her equally dead gaze and then recaptured it with a soft 'Ugghsnghh' and an offering of a posey.

... and now you're telling me he just hit her in the head with a rock!?!? Insanity!!
 

Kramodlog

Naked and living in a barrel
Have you ever read The evolution of man or how I ate father by Roy Lewis (many different titles depending on editions). Very funny and insightful.

Anyway, you just summerized two of the three ways we do "courtship".
 

Zombie_Babies

First Post
Have you ever read The evolution of man or how I ate father by Roy Lewis (many different titles depending on editions). Very funny and insightful.

Anyway, you just summerized two of the three ways we do "courtship".

I have not but I shall add it to my list. :)

Yeah, 'courtship' is certainly interesting.
 

Janx

Hero
Long thread so perhaps it has been mentioned so far, but the first successful smallpox vaccine developed by Edward Jenner was done in stark violation of modern medical efforts. He inoculated a child with cowpox to test his theory that cowpox exposure would immunize someone to smallpox. Smallpox was one of the more virulent diseases of its day and Jenner using an unwitting child as his test subject is a prospect most physicians nowadays would consider horrific. In some cases the cowpox inoculation did kill its patients, though due to shoddy medical records of the time other circumstances might have also been at work. Yet Jenner's work likely saved hundreds of thousands of lives, if not millions, with his vaccine. The cowpox-smallpox vaccine is in fact where we get the word vaccine. If it hadn't been for Jenner, not only might it have taken many more years for humans to discover how to vaccinate (germ theory wouldn't be developed for decades), but smallpox would have killed many people who survived smallpox outbreaks because they had been inoculated with cowpox. It was extremely controversial in its day, but (at the time) General George Washington ordered his troops on some occasions to receive cowpox inoculations, as even before Jenner, it had been observed (mostly by farmers) that those who had contracted cowpox were immune to smallpox. During the 18th century, war caused death more through disease than by death on the battlefield and smallpox was a major culprit. Numerous American Revolutionaries survived smallpox outbreaks that killed French, British, German, and Native American combatants during the American Revolutionary War.

That is the best example I can think of for ends justifying means. Of course medical science has advanced significantly since then to the point where we don't need to use humans as test subjects for these things to the same degree, and modern medical ethics requires permission from the patient. Nevertheless, at the time, with limited scientific medical knowledge, Jenner gambled on his patients' lives and humanity was the real winner. It is still important to remember however that Jenner was experimenting a hypothesis on human subjects, usually without their knowledge. And there were a great many medical practitioners in the day who acted the same on such hypotheses which turned out to be quite wrong. So are the means only justified when the ends are favorable?

That was the kind of example I suspected existed.

In some ways, what Jenner did wasn't that risky, some people already kind of suspected getting sick with Cowpox was safe, and seemed to prevent getting sick with Smallpox.

He just performed a more specific test that he suspected would work.

So my "oh my gosh he used a child!" reaction is watered down by "the kid will probably be fine based on what folks like George Washington already knew"

I bet he felt he had to use a child, so he had a reasonably known medical history (less time alive to get sick with stuff he'd forgotten about).
 

MJS

First Post
I'm sorry but all I can muster after reading this is a 'huh'? You do understand, I hope, that men are programmed to perform a function that differs greatly from 'protect' where women are concerned. That's what's natural for us. The world we live in today is constructed to be something very different.
perhaps this conversation is simply too nuanced for forums, as I don't know what you're talking about either
 




Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top