Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Extremely obligated.

13 (12.9%)

Very obligated

21 (20.8%)

Moderately obligated.

23 (22.8%)

Slightly obligated.

12 (11.9%)

No obligation.

23 (22.8%)

Trash option for snarky answers.

9 (8.9%)

Total Members Voted: 99

[misko27]

Racism shouldnt be the first place we all jump to.   And Im pretty sure that citing its orgins as the primary proof of a flaw is . . . prejudiced.  If you can do that for a country you can do it for a man.

But, in countries especially that can often be the case. I'm not saying anything about the Australian example, but for example the US was founded as part of a enraged backlash against a tyrannical central authority, and the echoes of that still shape America today.

Plus that really isn't a fair comparison. You can't say that if you would do it to a country you can do it to a man; there's no evidence for that in any legal or philosophical ideas I've ever heard of. Countries are not, nor have they ever been, individuals. And if the facts support something and logical arguments connect the claim about the origin to the present, isn't it prejudiced to ignore it? Again I'm not speaking about Australia specifically, but you seem very dismissive.

Use an argument to explain why that Australia's origins as a penal colony doesn't effect it's stance on immigration rather then dismissing it out of hand. If it is wrong there should be arguments or evidence against it, and there should be no problem.

[Graknorke]

And Im pretty sure that citing its orgins as the primary proof of a flaw is . . . prejudiced.  If you can do that for a country you can do it for a man.

That bit was far less serious. It's a thing that happens. The Australians win at cricket and rugby and then in return we remind them that they're descended from petty criminals.

[Haspen]

I dunno. I picked moderately obligated because my willingness to help others is based on two things:

A) My mood.
B) How tired I am.

And there's of course the non-conditional issue when I help my family no matter what, plus that elderly lady from other staircase(?) ('klatka', if you're Polish) because she always carries ton of stuff in her bags... I just absentmindendly say 'Miss I will carry these' and bring them up to her door _{She insists on saying 'God bless you' each time x3}

[pisskop]

@misko

Im certainly not the first to compare the state to a man.

Im at work and not equipped to push the point much.  And we were not discussing whether its orgins as a penal colony mean anything.  I was pointing out that calling them racists mainly because of the actions back then  exhibits the same shallow thinking of racism.
* at least if it is  a serious accusation. . .*

@Graknorke

I figured it out after.  :/  no take backs? 


-- 

either way, Does the presence of state funding lessen any obligation you feel?

[Knit tie]

I am naturally feeling very obligated to help others. Just because.

[i2amroy]

Generally the way that I look at it is that helping other people is an investment in my future. You never know when that person you help out on the street might turn out to be your boss, and while most of the time it's fairly likely they won't remember, I think that if it doesn't really cost you anything (a moment of time, a dollar or two that you have to spare) it's well worth the cost.

For larger things, on the other hand, I tend to follow the live and let live philosophy. I won't screw you over if you don't screw me over.

[CubicalSucrose]

No obligation. But it's so often utility positive that I tend to build a lot of relationships, especially when there's limited downside.

[Trapezohedron]

I think of myself less as a person and more of a tool to enhance other people's lives.

Whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't really know.

[Caz]

No obligation. But it's so often utility positive that I tend to build a lot of relationships, especially when there's limited downside.

Pretty much.

[hops]

I think of myself less as a person and more of a tool to enhance other people's lives.

Whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't really know.

I think that a person is a tool to enhance their fellow people's lives.
I think I'm a person.

Does that count?

[Trapezohedron]

I think of myself less as a person and more of a tool to enhance other people's lives.

Whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't really know.

I think that a person is a tool to enhance their fellow people's lives.
I think I'm a person.

Does that count?

We're all tools good for sharpening each other?

[hops]

I think of myself less as a person and more of a tool to enhance other people's lives.

Whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't really know.

I think that a person is a tool to enhance their fellow people's lives.
I think I'm a person.

Does that count?

We're all tools good for sharpening each other?

Yeah imo that's how a healthy society is supposed to work.
And if we're being Freudian about it we are kind of helping others for the selfish purpose of promoting our race.

[Kedly]

If I can, and know how to. I'll usually help out. I usually don't know how to help in most situations though. Unless I really dislike someone though, if asked to do something within my capabilities, even  by a stranger, I will likely do it.

[pisskop]

I think of myself less as a person and more of a tool to enhance other people's lives.

Whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, I don't really know.

I think that a person is a tool to enhance their fellow people's lives.
I think I'm a person.

Does that count?

We're all tools good for sharpening each other?

Yeah imo that's how a healthy society is supposed to work.
And if we're being Freudian about it we are kind of helping others for the selfish purpose of promoting our race.

Awesome.  I can dig it.

[Descan]

What does obligated mean? :V

Like... I don't feel like I'll be punished if I DON'T help others... But I don't think that's what you were getting at...?

I dunno. I like helping people, and I try to if my social anxiousness (I'd say anxiety but I think that's an actual diagnosis, I don't have) doesn't get in the way, but I don't feel like I MUST...

Anyway, my politics of "Get everyone off the street [via basic income] and then hands off everything except consumer, worker, and environmental protection regulations, case-by-case basis for any other regs" enter into this here, because aside from helping in life-and-death situations, I don't really feel the need to aid people like at soup kitchens or homeless shelters. I sometimes give money to the homeless but that's only because I'm terrible at saying no. [I don't think that all homeless will just go spend it on booze, I'm sure there are some who do but I feel that most homeless are homeless due to circumstance than inherent flaws.] Thus I would rather the state help everyone equally get an economic foothold and then just lay-off, let the tides of capitalism work. If someone like me doesn't feel the need to give of my flesh, then I don't expect enough other people to donate to charity to actually accomplish anything, and I think the statistical numbers bear that out.

At any rate, like I said, I don't know what you mean by obligated. Economically I don't feel personally obligated, life-and-death situations I feel obligated. I don't know about any other situations.

doooon't think this makes any sense, i'ma  little tipseh

took me a few dozen minutes to write this