Are People Obligated to "Get" Social Games?

Discussions that deal with moral issues. Key questions in ethics include: How should one live? What is right (or wrong) to do? What is the best way for humans to live?

Are People Obligated to "Get" Social Games?

Postby Daktoria on February 10th, 2012, 2:51 pm 

This might seem a little rough on some of you, but it's a question nonetheless.

Society can only accommodate people so much with regards to innocence. After all, people need to have freedom to move, freedom to act, and security against absurdity. A world of perfect innocence would entail everyone having to be cautious about everything, preventing anyone from ever acting with confidence. It would also allow deliberate wrongdoers to cheat the system such that the rule of law can never really be preserved. Enforcers and legislators would have to dedicate their lives explaining right versus wrong to wrongdoers.

To a degree, pragmatism is necessary even if that results in overlapping realms of doubt. When overlap happens, we call it "drama". Sometimes, unfortunately, drama works out the wrong way...

...but it's, again, unfortunately, necessary as a defense mechanism against wrongdoers. Take simple acts. Breathing, walking, talking. These are all physical forces. To some degree, they could be argued as coercive.

Take a slightly more complicated act. Eating. Eating involves the extinction of life so other life can survive.

Social competition. Competition involves hierarchy. There are winners and losers. Even within mandatory public education (which is provided to ascertain reasoning skills and build community), some excel who are guilty, some fall through the cracks who are innocent.

The fundamental problem is administrators are people too. They have lives to live. They can't be burdened with indefinite duty of care in explaining and investigating right versus wrong. At some level, they have to make a leap of faith, and that involves disregarding insignificant events...

...significance which, yes, is subjective.

Ergo, are people obligated to get social games? Are those who don't get social games undeserving of protection?
Daktoria
Banned User
 
Posts: 255
Joined: 28 Jan 2010


Re: Are People Obligated to "Get" Social Games?

Postby Laconic Lethality on February 13th, 2012, 7:35 pm 

Daktoria, I think I understand your reasoning, although I arrived at the question earlier from another method.

My question is man's nature as an end in himself. Man is certainly a social creature, but is he only useful as a peice of a whole, a cog in the machine? If so, it would be easy to infer that man could become obsolete based on his level of production, that an efficient machine would regulate itself through social darwinism or Marxism.

The counterexample is Objectivism, that man is an end in himself, acting naturally in his own self-interest, and society is merely a collection of like-minded individuals. Government should be created for the sake of man, although it often ignores this purpose.

The outliers here are those that simply do not wish to be a part of the system, the "social game" you mentioned. They are existentialists who disagree with their fellow man, they are Tom Sawyer, who would rather live life to the fullest than toil in vain for society, they are all individuals who cannot live within the matrix of society.

I say this because I am one of them; in any ideal system, any community would include and provide selflessly for all persons. My hypothesis is that because of the sins of man and his leaders, factors such as crime, alienation, and rebellion are not only inevitable but necessary to some extent. The result is a tangled sociological web.

You bring up a few points which, due to their philosophic nature, are the central question in the extraordinarily well-written but lesser known dystopian novel, "We", by Yevgeny Zamyatin. I will post a link below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_(novel)
Hope you enjoy if you read it and thank you for your argument,
Laconic Lethality
User avatar
Laconic Lethality
Member
 
Posts: 55
Joined: 02 Dec 2011
Location: South Carolina, USA



Return to Ethics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests