Function (2) - Anonymous Text / Action for Violet City

[ladywithnovoice]

Text/

What do you think is worse:

Someone who hurts other people for their own selfish reasons and admits it?

Or

Someone who hurts other people but says it's for a good cause?


- Starly

Action/

[It's been a long treck to get here, and one can find Red by Sprout Tower just sitting by the water and tossing bread out to the local Duckletts. Two Growlithe and an Electrike are napping around her. They've just finished a long journey so they're allowed to relax.]

[It's a rather peaceful scene, if you can ignore the Kricketot that might suddenly run up to you with its antennae clicking together.]

Comments

anon text

[envy_the_sinners]

The two fit hand in hand better than you may expect.

anon text

[ladywithnovoice]

I've never really had much experience with either.

I feel like the latter type of person might object to that, however.

- Starly

anon text

[envy_the_sinners]

Of course they would. To not object would only disprove the delusion.

Text

[dressofheaven]

The second one usually winds up doing much worse things, because they can justify anything to themselves. Especially if the cause is something really big like "saving the world".

[Bitterness can't really be sent through text, but boy is Ilya trying.]

Anon Text

[ladywithnovoice]

So it's less about what other people think, and more about fooling themselves then?

- Starly

anon text;

[ossifragant]

The latter.

The first person is honest. The second pretends to have a noble goal, but in the end still has a selfish pursuit.

The sort of person who would claim that their selfish goal is morally superior is the type of person I can't stand.

anon text;

[ladywithnovoice]

It seems like they would be easier to deal with, too. Or, at least, easier to come to terms with.

Have you dealt with the second kind of person a lot then?

- Starly

txt;

[otakon_geek]

I think people who hurt others and say it's for a good cause. That's the worst.

He knows all about those kind of people. He'd worked with them back at Shadow Moses, when Liquid was in charge of the Metal Gear REX project.

txt; anon forever on this end

[ladywithnovoice]

That seems to be the general vote. It sounds like a lot of people seem to have experience with them.

- Starly

[text]

[lieutenantantichrist]

I'm not real good at this abstract shit. Let me put it another way, see if I have this right.

Say you've got a guy shooting up a bank. He's grabbed somebody's grandma and yelling that he's going to blow her brains out unless they open up the vault. But he doesn't get the chance, because a police sniper puts a bullet through his head.

You're asking me which one's the asshole here.

[text]

[ladywithnovoice]

[Give her a second, Blake, that's pretty friggin' violent.]

Not quite what I was going for. Sorry.

Try more...

First guy shoots someone because he does want their money and he admits it.

Second guy- not related to what's going on with the first guy- shoots someone and when he's found out, he says that by shooting that person then he's somehow made the world better. He's not a police sniper. This is just something he decided on his own. He can reason it out to you and he obviously believes it, but there's no actual proof that what he's doing will actually make the world better.

[...She's pretty sure that's a closer analogy, at any rate.]

anon text

[a_sin_for_him]

Neither is better or worse than the other. Hurt isn't measured and quantified by those that cause it, but those that feel it.

anon text

[ladywithnovoice]

That's one way to look at things.

Do you think it would hurt less if it was pain caused by the second kind of person? You could tell yourself it's for a better cause, after all.

- Starly

text- anon is for losers

[nolongerachild]

[Guan Xing's on the way to the National Park, when he decides to actually give his device another glance. And that question...

Well.]

It does depend. Is the second person truly doing it for a good cause? Or are we to assume we cannot tell?

text- or for people who don't know how to use technology?

[ladywithnovoice]

Assume "it's complicated". You only have their word.

regular text forever

[islandshore]

It's a tough call. Option A's dangerous because they know exactly what they're doing, and they don't care. They do it anyway, which means they're probably messed up. Sociopaths, maybe.

But option B's not much better. People like that are often delusional, but I guess that depends on how they're hurting people and what they're planning. Armies supposedly fight for a good cause, but they're still taking lives. But on the other hand, you've got people who, say, fight Team Rocket. Sometimes you can't avoid hurting others, and sometimes it's actually justified.

regular text forever

[ladywithnovoice]

You're the second person to say one's not much better than the other sometimes. Another armchair philosopher or just experience?

- Starly

not anon!

[heartdive]

i think both are just as bad. some times those 'good causes' can be selfish too, you know?

[ladywithnovoice]

Yeah, I do. You've met the types?

[twinsanity]

Well, I'm sure that people will say that the former is somehow better because at least the person doing the hurting is honest, but admitting it doesn't change what was done. Being honest about being a terrible person is still being a terrible person, isn't it?

[ladywithnovoice]

Yeah. I guess honesty means a lot to some people.

Although, to be fair, the general consensus seems to be "because they're easier to deal with". There's also a good few people who say that they're both just as bad.

Is that what you think too?

[text]

[beholdmydemons]

The latter. Always the latter.

[text]

[ladywithnovoice]

Bad experiences?

[text]

[soundmind]

I'm not sure...that sounds like a question that you should have a definite answer to and I don't think there is one. There's people that do horrible selfish things but think it's worthwhile to do, and there's people that do things that are "bad" for good to come in the first place.

Like at the Academy, we destroy targets that were once human, but only so they don't hurt anybody and...they've lost their humanity.

[text]

[ladywithnovoice]

Sounds scary.

How do you know for sure that some "bad" things are done for "good"? Sometimes you just have someone's word that it's for the best.