Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘immoral’

Originally posted on Facebook Notes

Our country is seeing a growing support of socialist (marxist) policy changes. Just about any way you cut it, such governance is taking from one that has to give to one that has not. Last time I checked, taking from someone is stealing. Progressive taxation seems to be the current method being used (taxing more the people who earn more). Are not the people who earn more the people who work harder or are the most skilled in most cases?
And when it comes to taxation, even though the connection is more subtle when applied to a people who try for the most part to abide the law of the land, the fact is taxation ultimately comes down to government taking from the governed at the point of a gun. (don’t believe me? refuse to pay your taxes, refuse to answer the summons you receive as a result and see how long it takes for someone with a badge and a gun to show up at your door)
Besides the obvious insanity of punishing achievement, how can you morally justify taking from one group and ‘redistributing’ it to another?

Read Full Post »

Originally posted to Facebook Notes

To explain my perspective on various types of behavior I often use these definitions to define said behavior. It is important to understand the reason(s) people do the things they do, especially when framing how to respond to those behaviors or when speaking of ‘love’ and ‘hate’. (in my opinion ‘hate’ is just as legitimate and emotion as ‘love’ so long as ‘hate’ is confined to those people or actions that threaten to destroy the things or people you love) For the purposes of this discussion, I focus specifically on misguided actions or behaviors and their causes.

Ignorance: not knowing something
Ignorance by itself can be excusable. I, myself, am ignorant on a great many things. Simply not knowing something, or not knowing all there is to know about something is not an inherent ‘wrong’. We are all ignorant about a great many things.
More often than not, the relevance of ‘ignorance’ comes down to a ‘need to know’. For example, I don’t ‘need to know’ how to fix the carburetor on a car engine – as a result I am ignorant on how to fix a carburetor. I have no doubt I could learn how to fix a carburetor, but I don’t need to.

Stupidity: the inability to learn or know about something
Stupidity again is excusable. It is a lack of ability to know something. I fully admit I am stupid when it comes to interior decorating. I don’t get it, I never will get it. I have no desire to ‘be’ an interior decorator, and if I ever really desire for top-notch ‘interior design’ I can always hire someone to do it for me.

Idiocy*: being ‘ignorant’ about something but acting in spite of that ignorance. Or making a conscious choice to remain ignorant when you really should not do so.
*This one is a bit tougher, because I could not find a precise word to assign to it based on ‘denotative’ meaning. So instead I chose the term ‘idiocy’ for it’s connotative interpretation. A more accurate word would be ‘ignoramus’, but the connotative perception of ‘idiot’ works.
With that said, I describe ‘idiocy’ as someone that can or should know better, but acts in spite of their ignorance. To use the prior examples, if I really needed the use of my truck but decided to attempt to fix my carburetor myself, I would be an idiot. Similarly, if I took a job fixing carburetors but still chose not to learn how, I would also be an idiot. Or if I were to claim to know something about interior decorating, when I do not and cannot understand it, I would again be an idiot.

Incidiot*:  (Ihn-sih-dee-oht) Someone who does know better, but either feigns ignorance or tries to justify it when ignoring the facts about their course of action.
*this is a term I coined by merging the term ‘incite’ with my concept of ‘idiocy’
This term refers to someone who would seem to be behaving like the ‘idiot’ described above. Someone that acts inspite of not knowing something. However, they either do know or are in a position that it is highly likely they should know about the subject in question. i.e. a trained mechanic who intentionally fouls up a carburetor in the process of fixing it could fit this definition.
My concept of the ‘incidiot’ is therefore important to note, because someone that is feigning ignorance about a subject, and takes an action that is inherently immoral or wrong, is therefore intentionally behaving in a fashion that could be described as ‘evil’.

Read Full Post »