*Gives a look of Detriment*

[Savvy]

For those of you who recognize me from a while ago, then I'm back, I guess. I feel so inconsiderate having left like that for so long...again, without warning, but it's better late than never, I would hope.

Well, anyway, I guess you can consider this my post dedicated to re-iterating myself with those who may have forgotten me and my unnecessarily explanatory behavior, and to project that who have never laid eyes on the words of the strange person who speaks here. So, "Hi", and, "Hello again." It works both ways, obviously...

As you can tell, I'm a bit insecure about what people know about my reasoning for things...but just to be clear, if it's anything derogatory you have to say that has little to no testament about me, I really wouldn't give a damn to dignify you with a response, or I would strip you of whatever dignity you threw at me with a retaliatory strike with my "words of justice." Not particularly a warning, but consider it like paper burning; it just happens if you provoke it.

So, that's me in a nutshell. Convoluted? Not particularly. I tend to get along with everyone (except jerks and idiots and those others deserving of the gallows of words of punishment)...so feel free to talk to me if you like.

Ciao for now.

[Chaotic Forces]

Er, what? So you're back then and aren't taking a choice of bad words from people?

[Lazy Bastard]

Heh, this thread makes it seem like you expect a certain percentage of people to hate you from the start. Welcome back, Savvy.

[Chaotic Forces]

I just hate the fact that she's much smarter than I am.

[Helder]

Better read up on some ethics there Chaotic,welcome back Savvy hell I'm back myself I've only been around for a few months.I've been gone for a lil over 2 years.

[Savvy]

Er, what? So you're back then and aren't taking a choice of bad words from people?

I kind of mixed up an introductory topic with a return-from-a-long-absence topic...so it probably didn't make much sense if you took it seriously. Quite frankly, not even I thought it made much sense.

And, I don't really expect anyone to hate me, but it sure does look like I want to provoke it, doesn't it? Eh, whatever. Thanks for the welcomes back, and welcome back to helder, too. Yay.

[Helder]

thanks,I guess!? Since I've been back a bit Ik figured that everyone game me a silent welcome hehe.

[Chaotic Forces]

Ethics? Have none of them. I think it's safe to say that anyway.

[Savvy]

Ethics? Have none of them. I think it's safe to say that anyway.

Depends on who you say it to. I get that the pre-conceived perception of ethics is not particularly all it should be, but most all people do follow it as if it were ingrained into their brain the very minute they were born. Imagine what some chivalrous Englishmen will think of you.

[Chaotic Forces]

I mean I don't really care to blindy follow the rest of society. Half the people I know wouldn't see a problem with taking someone's wallet off the ground and taking what's inside.

[Savvy]

I mean I don't really care to blindy follow the rest of society. Half the people I know wouldn't see a problem with taking someone's wallet off the ground and taking what's inside.

Well, that's because there's a likelihood they'd be in a crowd and thus unnoticed. And, so, the injustice requires no atonement, because, since no one saw it happen, it apparently never did. So, when it comes down to it, it's up to what obligations you have to yourself. I mean, seeing a wallet laying on the ground...You may want it, but the supposition that the person it belongs to should want it as well should be something that hits you. It's either you're obliged to act out of lust or selflessness. Now, I didn't call those greed and virtue, because, in context, those are the values questioned, and so to use them contradicts the entire thesis in itself. I mean, take Robin Hood. He took from the rich and gave to the poor. To the rich, that was greed on Hood's part, but to Hood, he was being virtuous as the advocate of the poor. But, rather, this is a poor example in terms of our modern society.

With us, today, we at least delude ourselves with the commune that everyone can and should receive and excel. That's why we hate bankruptcy and evictions...because not only to the victim, but to others as well, those are just acts of the government depriving people of what they can't suffice to have one way or the other. We just think that's sadistic, for the most part. So, taking someone's wallet is against the "receive and excel" conformity, but that's only if someone is there to acknowledge it and emanate the blame subsequently placed on you. But, if you are not observed, the act is not acknowledged, and so you can go your way with what you did, because there's no drawbacks to it so far as you know. Yes, this does satisfy you, and yes, you did receive, but at the cost of depriving someone else of the same...

So, all in all, ethics is really the commensalistic formula for society. Everything benefits with neutral consequence. Thus, we strive to set balance to the world's morals. We try to keep as little people deprived as possible. Thus, the overall benefit is not as scarred, yet not as golden, either.