• Man saves drowning family, but they leave him to drown in return
    259 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Feuver;36798605]That's just stupid. "All news are depressing, so I should be depressed" This is in China, over there, a lot of things are different. [b]A lot of people only care about themselves[/b].[/QUOTE] How is that any different in the West.
[QUOTE=PowerBall v1;36800300]Survival of the fittest I guess.[/QUOTE] middle aged parents and young children vs man in his twenties (who died) definitely survival of the fittest, mate!
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;36800131]I don't really see what there is to refute, you're saying that because we have emotions we can only do things for the sake of our own gain, whether that be emotional or otherwise, however I don't see how one cannot do something for the gain of others. I don't see how doing something for the good of another cannot be altruistic simply because no matter what happens you get something out of it. I mean if you deem altruism as doing something for literally no gain what so ever then of course it's impossible since you can always argue that you will get at least something out of it, however I would say that altruism is based on the reason for doing the act, not the result of it, thus doing something for someone elses gain to gain happiness yourself is not altruist, however if you do something for the gain of another, because you feel it is right that they gain something and happiness is merely a product of doing what you feel was right then I don't see how that isn't altruism (this is getting kind of mind bending)[/QUOTE] I agree that it's the intention, but my point is that it's impossible to intend to help others. (well, primarily). My point was that, if it was possible for you to do something for the sake of others and not for emotional gain, then, if we removed emotions from someone, that someone would still act, because he can still help others. However, if you removed emotions, you wouldn't be able to want to do things and, as such, wouldn't do them. I guess this pretty much just says "you do it because you want to ". and no matter what is it that you do to satisfy that, it's still selfish because you aren't doing it for others, you're doing it for yourself.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;36800350]I agree that it's the intention, but my point is that it's impossible to intend to help others. (well, primarily). My point was that, if it was possible for you to do something for the sake of others and not for emotional gain, then, if we removed emotions from someone, that someone would still act, because he can still help others. However, if you removed emotions, you wouldn't be able to want to do things and, as such, wouldn't do them. I guess this pretty much just says "you do it because you want to ". and no matter what is it that you do to satisfy that, it's still selfish because you aren't doing it for others, you're doing it for yourself.[/QUOTE] I don't know, the time that I had to decide to end a relationship I was in because I was getting constant advice to do so, and feeling terrible about doing it was the best thing and I still felt horrible for it. People can be irrational at times. What feels best isn't always best, and people can act outside of those endorphins.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;36800350]I agree that it's the intention, but my point is that it's impossible to intend to help others. (well, primarily). My point was that, if it was possible for you to do something for the sake of others and not for emotional gain, then, if we removed emotions from someone, that someone would still act, because he can still help others. However, if you removed emotions, you wouldn't be able to want to do things and, as such, wouldn't do them. I guess this pretty much just says "you do it because you want to ". and no matter what is it that you do to satisfy that, it's still selfish because you aren't doing it for others, you're doing it for yourself.[/QUOTE] But if what I want is that others gain then surely that is not selfish?
And I think happiness is the only thing that people do anything for because what you do, you do what you think should happen which is what you think is good. And what is good is what has worth. And there are only two things in the world. Physical and mental things. Physical things can't have worth because it's just a rock, worth can only exist in the mind, and the mental things can be split into knowledge and emotion, but knowledge is just taking physical things and merging and combining them in the mind, which is just creating a new world, ergo, more physical things. That leaves emotion and every emotion can be expressed in happiness and unhappiness in relation to something (like envy being unhappiness in relation to others having things you don't), so the only thing you can put worth in is happiness and unhappiness, and, through experience of both, happiness is the good one while unhappiness is the bad one. So, all you can put worth on is happiness. Although, I've had a lot more faith in this thought than I do now. [editline]16th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=carcarcargo;36800413]But if what I want is that others gain then surely that is not selfish?[/QUOTE] Not really, you're still not doing it for them, you're doing it for you because it's what you want. And I'd say you did it because you thought it was what would give you more happiness, or should I say, less unhappiness
May I point out that I can't find a decent source for this? All the pictures were provided by 'neitzeins' on one website, the OP is from something called 'Stomp Team', which hardly sounds like Returners. I don't get how this thread has 5 pages when the only factual information is from shoddy news sites, tumblr discussions and flickr.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;36800667]May I point out that I can't find a decent source for this? All the pictures were provided by 'neitzeins' on one website, the OP is from something called 'Stomp Team', which hardly sounds like Returners. I don't get how this thread has 5 pages when the only factual information is from shoddy news sites, tumblr discussions and flickr.[/QUOTE] because any sort of philosophical(albeit fairly mundane) discussion should not be had regardless?
The price of rescuing someone from drowning is risking your own death. He was willing to take the chance and paid the price. They elected not to risk it, which I can't fault them for doing. Consider this: till he rescued them, they were going to drown right? So how does that make them qualified to rescue a drowning person, they couldn't rescue themselves!
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;36800711]The price of rescuing someone from drowning is risking your own death. He was willing to take the chance and paid the price. They elected not to risk it, which I can't fault them for doing. Consider this: till he rescued them, they were going to drown right? So how does that make them qualified to rescue a drowning person, they couldn't rescue themselves![/QUOTE] Nonono you're completely missing it! We're against their reaction, not their actions!
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;36798503]Every time I look in the news I keep seeing more and more reasons as to why I should never try to save anyone.[/QUOTE] No it's not that you shouldn't save anyone it's that you shouldn't save anyone if you're in China.
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;36800711]The price of rescuing someone from drowning is risking your own death. He was willing to take the chance and paid the price. They elected not to risk it, which I can't fault them for doing. Consider this: till he rescued them, they were going to drown right? So how does that make them qualified to rescue a drowning person, they couldn't rescue themselves![/QUOTE] If they had said that they didn't want to risk their lives for him there wouldn't have been nearly as much backlash in this thread as there was. But actually leaving while the man who saved your life is drowning and then proceeding to say that it's "'none of my damn business" is about as cold blooded as it gets.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;36800888]If they had said that they didn't want to risk their lives for him there wouldn't have been nearly as much backlash in this thread as there was. [/QUOTE] if people understood why they didn't want to risk their lives, there wouldn't be as much of a backlash
Wow... Douchebags.. In *JK Disclaimer* MURICA i bet some people would do the same.. I would help him, but people are dicks and In china It gets you sued.
[QUOTE=Cypher_09;36800768]Nonono you're completely missing it! We're against their reaction, not their actions![/QUOTE] But if they aren't going to try to rescue the guy, then why hang around? It is none of their business if they are not taking part in the rescue. I don't know, does everyone think if they hang around and cry over his dead body that makes them good people? What's the point of that? That's my point- either help or GTFO. They chose to GTFO since they couldn't even help themselves when their lives depended on it.
My mother immigrated from China and she always told me to never directly help a person if they got hurt Fucking stupid Chinese legal system [editline]16th July 2012[/editline] Doesn't help that old Chinese people tend to be giant fucking assholes
Damn, no good deed goes unpunished.
Maybe he just didn't want to live in that place of assholes anymore, and decided to go out like the baddest hero on the block!
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;36800706]because any sort of philosophical(albeit fairly mundane) discussion should not be had regardless?[/QUOTE] Not the point.
[QUOTE=prooboo;36798262]Once again: morality doesn't apply when you've got a family. [editline]16th July 2012[/editline] It's cold, sure, but you can't be weak in front of your family either.[/QUOTE] I'll keep this in mind if I ever see you drowning.
[QUOTE=prooboo;36798829]We're animals. Hell no, I'd be fucking pissed if I saw this dude walking by, totally able to help me. But my emotions and feelings can't get in the way of rational judgement. That guy is in no way obligated to do anything against his own will, morally speaking that is.[/QUOTE] So the way I understand it, you see no reason for people to help others unless they benefit somehow in the process. Jesus fuck, you're seriously one of the most self obsessed fucks I've ran into on the internet. [B][I]FUCK[/I][/B]
Update: [quote]The family of three who was saved by a man from drowning, then left him to drown in return, turned up at the victim's home and kowtowed and apologized to his family. Deng Jinjie saved a family of three from drowning. However, he disregarded his personal safety and drowned instead. Instead of helping, the family of three left him to struggle claiming it was 'none of their business'. This happened in Loudi City Sunshuihe Park, China. The family showed up at the Deng Jinie's family's home under the 'protection' of local authorities, on the 'seventh day after death' of the victim. They kowtowed and apologized in front of a portrait of Deng Jinjie. The family was escorted by over thirty people from the Louxing District Government, Dake Local Police Station, and County Government. The family also handed an envelope with an unknown amount of cash to Deng's mother. Attempts to ask the family questions about Deng's death were unsuccessful, as they were pushed into a car by the government people.[/quote] [url]http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/stomp/sgseen/this_urban_jungle/1201108/trio_who_left_saviour_to_drown_kowtow_and_apologize.html[/url]
Wer all human bengs and desrve to be not druwnd?
its not like they were [i]entitled[/i] to save him but the fact that they just left immediately was pretty bad
This thread is a selfish gene showcase
That's pretty awful. I think it woulda been better if the crowd heave-hoed those fuckers back in the river.
[QUOTE=Kegan;36802445]That's pretty awful. I think it woulda been better if the crowd heave-hoed those fuckers back in the river.[/QUOTE] So what you're saying is this. One loss of life isn't enough, lets just kill this entire family! Killing the entire family would be pointless. You are upset because of a death, so lets justify it with more death!
I hope they die in whatever chinese piece of shit car they ride in.
Despite this, there are still good people in the world. The media just focuses on the bad.
[QUOTE=Mr Uber Ostrich;36802600]So what you're saying is this. One loss of life isn't enough, lets just kill this entire family! Killing the entire family would be pointless. You are upset because of a death, so lets justify it with more death![/QUOTE] you're right, let's just dispose of the woman who said it was "none of her damn business."
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.