Radorth

Your honesty is appreciated, actually.

Rad

Amos

Sorry B. Shack but I don't mean that Gemma inspired you. The paradox is in the inspiration of dark gloomy poetry.

The "Madleine" (spelling Sabine?) in Paris is much the same. I find her strikingly beautifull and perfect in every way. Just loaded with artistic perfection. Yet people don't like her because she is not 'round.'

Proxima Centauri

Oh dear, I'm in trouble. At the moment there are several active threads here dealing with the terrible wrong known as plagiarism. Here's one thread.
I've decided to get involved quite a bit with this. Students get pushed off their courses for plagiarism. If the subject were discussed more fewer students would try it.
Plagiarism is sometimes accidental. Here comes the difficult bit. There is a Christian hymn, its called, "All Things Bright and Beautiful" In Britain its very well known. We all learn it before we leave Junior School and before we deconvert. :banghead: Yes, I wish there were less religious teaching here.
Well I rewrote, "All Things Bright and Beautiful". My version has the title, "All Things Bad and Horrible". Its on the link at the top of this post. Here in Britain I sing my version often. Freethinkers think its good. I never bother with an attribution. Anyone whose been to a British School knows the original.
I started posting, "All Things Bad and Horrible" on the Internet. Sometimes I attributed. Sometimes I didn't. It took me a few months before I realized on the Internet, "All Things Bad and Horrible" absolutely needs an attribution. English speakers outside the UK probably don't know the original.
So then I started making sure I never put, "All Things Bad and Horrible" on the Internet without attribution. Even then I carried on making mistakes. I was satisfied with the way, "All Things Bad and Horrible" is on the website linked above. If you go straight to The Guest Poet's Page it says, "All Things Bad and Horrible-- Barbara's take on the classic hymm." I was comfortable that was enough attribution. So what did I do wrong next?
Here in this thread I linked directly to the poem, not to the Guest Poet's Page. There's no attribution on the web page with the poem. And Amos probably thought the poem was original. Sorry Amos, I didn't mean to mislead you.
I never intended to plagiarize. Intentional plagiarists don't choose something very well known, as, "All Things Bright and Beautiful" is in the UK.
There is a lesson for you here. Students! please take great care to make all the attributions you need. Its easy to overlook something even if you don't want to be a plagiarist. Lecturers! please don't be hard on accidental plagiarists. You may not realize how easily its done till you are caught at it, or till you catch yourself at it.

Mad Kally

NO! I find it creepy that xians on this board and the other ones won't even answer a simple question.

Rhea

I'm wondering, too. This is a hard question? Some posters talked about "it depends on whether they learned a lesson" or "whether they were suffering much"

Huh?

Would YOU punish billions of people because of what two did wrong. That's it. Simple question. What's the difficulty here? I don't get it. Boil it down...

Would YOU punish a child for something her parents had done?

Would YOU punish a child if her parents were abusers? Even unrepentant abusers? If their abuse caused harm to the little girl, would you make sure she got beaten some more because of her parents' failure?

Would you punish EVEN ONE innocent person for the wrong of another when you didn't have to?

wildernesse

It's not a simple question, Kally. I can't give an absolute answer to a question that isn't specific.

Would I cause a billion people to suffer because of the actions of 2 people? I don't have enough information. If it is wrong to make decisions that would harm the multitude, why would it be ok to make those same decisions for 2 individuals? Like in my previous example:

The action of the two individuals (staying inside) means harm for many, but if I prevent that action it means harm for those 2. Who gives me the right to trample on the rights of those 2 friends and throw them to the wolves? Especially as I have no assurance (who trusts a death squad?) that the multitude will not come to harm even if I give up the 2.

You can't protect the rights of many by denying rights to a few. That's not justice.

--tibac

Rhea

Your example doesn't fit the question though.

Changing it...

The two are hiding in your house because they did something YOU didn't like. The 2 are the ones who did something wrong. They're not innocents hiding under your protection, they are GUILTY people hiding FROM you and the only reason the rest of the village is at risk is becuase of the threat of YOU punishing the village.

We're not saying someone else is threatening the village. ONLY YOU. I think that's what is being asked here. Would YOU punish an innocent person for the crime of another? Would you CHOOSE to punish innocent people due to the crime of another?

I don't see how you can say it looks like a scenario of a helpful citizen hiding an innocent from a tyrant. I think we all know that the question is about you CHOOSING to punish people.

Are there really circumstances when you will choose to personally mete out a punishment to an innocent because of the crime of their ancestors?

Rhea

Radorth says,
Only if said billions of people learned nothing from their mistakes.

So we see the little girl from my example. Her parents are abusers. Abusers get put in jail (and often killed there).

So you're saying this little girl should get put in jail and killed if she doesn't learn from wetting her pants?


????

REALLY?

Remember - the crime is with the parents. The little girl HAS NOT committed a crime. She is being punished for their crime. Despite the fact that she is a victim of their crime.

wildernesse

These are different questions than the first one, which asked if I would punish billions for the actions of 2. It didn't state anything about innocence or guilt.

Would I punish people for the mistakes of others? Not in a perfect world. However, I do that today thru my own prejudices and generalizations. It's something I work on. Would I punish people for the actions of their parents's actions? Not unless they were complicent in those actions and that guilt--again in a perfect world where I was completely in control of my emotions and a completely rational person.

I would not that any innocent people were punished, and I certainly don't want to be a party to that. However, I realize that my daily actions make me guilty of that very thing--my choices can and do subject people who have done nothing more than be born in another country, less fortunate than me, etc. to continual economic and social pain. It is something that I work on and think about often.

--tibac

Rhea

I suppose it did not say that. I assumed that "the actions of 2" meanth that the actions of the 2 warranted punishment and billions of other were being punished in addition to the 2. You are suggesting this is an unbased assumption?


Glad to hear that. I was actually quite worried that people exist who think it is okay to punish innocent people for the crimes of other people when they don't have to .