These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[RETRACTED]Denouncement of the Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Scherezad
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#61 - 2012-09-20 17:03:59 UTC
I must disengage from the question, unfortunately, as it is no longer productive. Thank you for bringing it up!
Dilaro thagriin
Doomheim
#62 - 2012-09-20 20:37:53 UTC
So, in your eyes, a despotism is more civilised than a democracy, that's certainly interesting.

and your emphasis is a moot point, each and every one of your supposed superiors is 'someone' .

There is no situation where a civilised individual should disregard logical and reasoned thought. no situation whatsoever.
Even under direct orders from one who claims superiority.

Murder is murder, whether you are ordered to do so, or choose to do so, the blood is on your hands, and no-one else's.
Choosing to do evils in the name of another, be they a human superior, or an omnipresent imaginary friend, does not absolve you of guilt.

You appear to have missed the point of my earlier comment, read it over, consider the words, and try to understand.
While i doubt you will gain anything from it ms Kim, I sincerely hope that you do.

-Dilaro
Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#63 - 2012-09-20 23:10:36 UTC
Malcolm Khross wrote:

The point I'm making is that your rhetorical situation leaves only two options: kill 100 to save 900 or let all 1000 die when any real situation involves many, many more options than this. Given your situation, however, I would never put the blood of 100 innocents on my hands to save 900 for it is better for all 1000 to perish at the hands of murderers and brigands while those whom are morally upright try and save those they can without becoming murderers themselves. In the end, the blood is on the hands of the killer, regardless of their intentions.



Moral relativism?

Moral relativism may be any of several philosophical positions concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different people and cultures. Descriptive moral relativism holds only that some people do in fact disagree about what is moral; meta-ethical moral relativism holds that in such disagreements, nobody is objectively right or wrong; and normative moral relativism holds that because nobody is right or wrong, we ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when we disagree about the morality of it
Devils Embrace
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2012-09-21 18:04:09 UTC
Malcolm Khross wrote:
Diana Kim wrote:

True that. However, Caldari commander should make better and faster decisions than other commanders. Caldari commander must uphold standards of Caldari superiority and maintain higher efficiency than other commanders.


We should strive to make better and faster decisions, no doubt. However, it is important to recognize the merits of your adversaries. The principle of honoring even your enemies is also a Caldari concept, Kim.

Diana Kim wrote:
The leader of a group, of course, should lead with best interests of the whole group. Even if it does mean sacrificing part of the group. Sometimes, you can't please everyone. Sometimes, you can't save everyone.
As for Caldari commander, he should keep interests of the State in the first place. Even if it means sacrificing himself with all of his subordinates in order to fulfill a given task. And, of course, excuses for not completing a mission, when some civilians blocked your way, can't be accepted.


Yes, sometimes being an effective and good leader requires that sacrifices be made and no it is not always possible to save everyone. Yet a leader must always strive to save everyone until all other options are exhausted, then she must strive to save as many as possible. In the end, no decision is simple; duty demands sacrifice and has cost, a leader must recognize this and seek to minimize cost and sacrifice as often as possible. That was the only point I sought to make.


Seems that Mr. Khross is not the leader that WHG needs, but the ONE that it deserves....

It's like they usually say about fantasy MMO's and men playing female characters: "If I'm going to spend alot of time watching this character, it might as well have a good looking ass".
Malcolm Khross
Doomheim
#65 - 2012-09-21 18:44:50 UTC
Devils Embrace wrote:
Seems that Mr. Khross is not the leader that WHG needs, but the ONE that it deserves....


While I am sure you are intending compliment with this, I must disagree with you.

The Wiyrkomi Honor Guard currently has the leader(s) it both needs and deserves.

~Malcolm Khross
Safai
Yaqin
#66 - 2012-09-24 17:58:16 UTC
Well now.

Another immortal sent to meet judgement. May your Maker have mercy.

Though, I can't help but wonder what happened.