Why do human beings do something immoral/evil while their goal is to achieve something good?
Case examples:
Will they achieve their goals?
The decadence of human morality has got me wondering.
being immoral is relative to something else. a person stealing to have a good life could be morally right based on his/her reasons
That argument is fallacious. It considers the reason without considering the act and the consequences it has on the others, especially the owner of the stolen goods/services.
Kujaza server ya @admin bila kitu ya maana unapost…
Question is what is kitu ya maana and what makes this less of kitu ya maana?
Are you measuring height using a weighing scale?
Nilikuwa namaanisha watu kaa mimi wenye wanajaza server… Kumbe hata wewe ni member?:D:D:D:D
How is being selfish “doing good” …I would expect some Robin Hood kind of do-gooder to apply here…
The end justifies the means. Immorality has been made to look okay so long as you are not caught in the process of acquiring cash and property through dubious means. Jaribu kusema hapa vile CK ni mwizi uone ni watu wangapi watakuja kukuambia hata wewe uibe uwache kulialia na jina za wengine. We almost pride in it a la “huyo angekuwa shiny eye, hangeshikwa”. It has become so normal the thieves are now the heroes. Si unakumbuka the duo that killed and murdered and are now our leaders? Good, you cannot expect us to be clean. Our leaders are a reflection of who we are.
I feel that you have misinterpreted everything.
Baada ya ku soul search ukakosa kujua ka you measuring height na weighing scale umeona tu Uchukue a Quick Right Turn and blame it on you…hehehe…:D:D:D
Inaitwa tactic ya ku-avert mafeelings avenue [SIZE=3]:D:D[/SIZE]
You get your foreskin slaughtered in the hope that you will have pleasurable moments when you grow up
I understand you. But is it an individual or a societal question?
My problem is: doesn’t the means used to achieve happiness bother some people? For example, a wife kills the husband so that she can live with her mpango and inherit all his wealth. Doesn’t it bother her that the means used to acquire the wealth and her desires is evil/immoral?
Again, is it an individual or a societal question? In the case of the wife above, who should be hold to account/blame? The wife? The society?
I doubt that … all the examples you have mentioned nothing good is achieved at the end.
Your example is good. But it biased and irrelevant here.
Should we pity the skin? Does the skin have a life on its own? Does it have a brain, a soul, a life, etc? Can the skin feel pain without the person?
To a great extent, and what I am saying hapo juu ni the society is supposed to ostracize such people, but does it? If the same society tells you that it is okay to steal, doesn’t it to a great extent come as a relief to perpetrators that immorality is accepted, but only if you are not caught?
Good. Intention should be aligned with action. Isn’t it?
If you want to live a happy life as a wealthy person, don’t steal the peasant’s land and don’t steal his money. In fact, that does not apply to the peasants only. Don’t steal anything.
In apportioning blame, both the individual and the society should not be spared. The individual can make his/her own judgement. That means he/she should take fully responsibility for decisions taken/made, as long as he/she is of sound mind. The society should also take responsibility for imparting bad values/practices to the individual. It is easy to punish the individual but how should the society be punished for not playing its role? Again, while it is easy to measure the individual’s level of guilt, what yardstick should be used to measure the society’s level of guilt?
Well, it would be difficult to quantify guilt, if that is what you mean by the measure of guilt. All I know is there are more people going around complaining about the bad leadership we have even after participating actively in electing the same leadership. Nyanza, RV and Western provinces have serious cases of corruption I can bet that the backlash will be people voting in other leaders who are seen as better. The percentage of leaders who will make it back vis a vis those who will not should be a measure of how much guilt the society is suffering as a result of having elected bad leaders? Not sure though.
I think we are in two different classes …my main issue is your wording …
My thoughts are in line with this >> is it justified to a wrong thing for the benefit of other persons other than yourself? Like the Robin Hood tale he did wrong but for a greater good…
Lakini in your statement there’s no good involved …stealing from peasants so as to live a “good/wealthy” life is just plain selfishness/evil