Would you blame humanity? (DESTINY SPOILERS)

[Fireflywyo300]

I agree with Mr. Bennett about rehashing it.

As for those people who want a "partial blame" option, then each and everyone of us, born centuries and even millennium after all of history, are responsible for what happened from the rise of Egypt and Mesopotamia through to present day.

With that reasoning in mind, I, as in individual living in the modern day, am responsible for all the evils that occurred in the human past?

No offense, but it's kind of a ridiculous argument and question. Furthermore, if you want to argue that humanity is solely a "collective" (pun-intended) and not a grouping of individual beings with various, distinct, and separate cultures, moralities, and personalities, then it kind of defeats the purpose of opposing the Borg.

 

[Marie1]

I think a "partial" blame results in the ability to avoid a black/white senario, it allows us, say, to blame the MACOs without blaming, us, or as you point out, people born after the events who could not have affected it.

And given how often humans carry on fights for generations, long after what started the war has been forgotten, the moral is relevant, I think.

 

[Fireflywyo300]

I think a "partial" blame results in the ability to avoid a black/white senario, it allows us, say, to blame the MACOs without blaming, us, or as you point out, people born after the events who could not have affected it.

But it IS black/white. INDIVIDUALS committed the act and the not humanity as a whole. The question was "Would you blame humanity?" (stress on the whole).

To that, the answer is a resounding NO from my opinion and it's clearly black/white. Individuals vs blaming humanity.

 

[Marie1]

But those humans are a result of many things, thus there actions were. A person is in part genetic, in part their up-bringing. So if their society taught them to escape at all costs, that it was okay to risk the murder of pacifists, then their society or whoever taught them that is to blame, so yes, also a small piece of the humanity that formed them.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

But those humans are a result of many things, thus there actions were. A person is in part genetic, in part their up-bringing. So if their society taught them to escape at all costs, that it was okay to risk the murder of pacifists, then their society or whoever taught them that is to blame, so yes, also a small piece of the humanity that formed them.

Society doesn't teach people to escape. It's *human nature* to do so.

 

[Christopher]

This whole debate just shows how pointless and ridiculous blame is. Who cares how far back you can trace past culpability for an act? That doesn't change the act or deal with its consequences. The past isn't worth worrying about -- it's the future that needs attention and effort devoted to it. Looking for people to blame for a problem is just a way to avoid taking responsibility for fixing it. It's a way people can feel they're addressing a problem without actually having to exert themselves to do anything constructive.

And in the wake of Destiny, nobody has the luxury for that kind of self-indulgent waste of time. They have real, immediate problems to deal with. They can't afford not to take responsibility for the future, so they can't afford the distraction of recriminations about the past.

 

[William Leisner]

I blame Hitler for this thread having gone on for as long as it has.

 

[Silversmok3]

Who's responsible for the Borg?

Nobody.The creation of the Borg was a mutation,an anomaly born of desparate circumstances that would not have existed had certain events not taken place.

Like,for example,the team accepting Lexrst's offer and blending by choice.

There can be no tribunal or judgement against anyone except Sedin for the Borg,and the Caeliar already took care of her .

That fact established,facts are cold comfort to someone who lost family members to an accident.If the Borg killed my family and another race of people said the Borg were a giant mistake that resulted in the loss of all who I love,I'll tell you right now I'd be pissed.And in that grief,pain,and anger I probably would blame the race who had accidently created the Borg.Assuming I believed that at face value.


Since there's no evidence one way or another,as far as the victims are concerned who's to say the MACOs didn't willingly join Sedin in making the Borg?
WE know that's false,but with the Caeliar unavailable for comment IF starfleet releases these events many who've been massacred by the Borg will naturally wonder why all those people died.There will be no evidence to say humanity DIDN'T create the Borg.


And with 60 billion dead,their survived will not take their loved one's deaths as a 'cosmic accident' at face value.They will,however unjustified ,seek someone to blame for such carnage,if only to assign a purpose where there was none.

Enter Humanity,stage left.IF Starfleet doesn't classify it (Which would be a stupid idea not to lock this down hardcore,for MANY reasons).

 

[Marie1]

But those humans are a result of many things, thus there actions were. A person is in part genetic, in part their up-bringing. So if their society taught them to escape at all costs, that it was okay to risk the murder of pacifists, then their society or whoever taught them that is to blame, so yes, also a small piece of the humanity that formed them.

Society doesn't teach people to escape. It's *human nature* to do so.

At any cost? No. Depending on your morale standards. You don't run over a group of kids on their way to school trying to drive your injured friend to the hospital for instance.

And I wouldn't say "blame" is an issue so much as knowing some about the fundamentals of society that helped create the problem. We could go around in circles for a billion years (lets not) placing blame according to personal beliefs, but if we only blame Sedin... I find that short-sighted, a bit. But I'm not going to blame *everyone* either...

 

[Sci]

But those humans are a result of many things, thus there actions were. A person is in part genetic, in part their up-bringing. So if their society taught them to escape at all costs, that it was okay to risk the murder of pacifists, then their society or whoever taught them that is to blame, so yes, also a small piece of the humanity that formed them.

Society doesn't teach people to escape. It's *human nature* to do so.

It is human nature to escape, possibly even to attack your actual captors. It is not human nature to commit mass murder, or to torture a fellow prisoner in the name of escape.

 

[Christopher]

Society doesn't teach people to escape. It's *human nature* to do so.

Not really. That's what shows like ST like to say, that there's some inbuilt human instinct craving freedom, but the fact is, plent of people are content to be led and to live their lives within some greater or lesser degree of confinement. Throughout most of human history, the vast majority of people have not been free, but have been subjects of regimes that had absolute power over their lives. The concept of individual freedom as a basic human right is less than three centuries old, and is far from universally observed even today. Even here in the Land of the Free, most people spend their whole careers confined in cubicles and cars and dreary apartments and tedious routines, and though they talk about yearning for freedom from the grind, most of them will never do anything to gain it.

Besides, the phrase "human nature" is uselessly broad. Human nature includes everything from Gandhi to Hitler, from Einstein to Barney Fife, from Evel Knievel to Adrian Monk. The only universal thing that can be said about human nature is that it rules nothing out.

 

[Silversmok3]

But those humans are a result of many things, thus there actions were. A person is in part genetic, in part their up-bringing. So if their society taught them to escape at all costs, that it was okay to risk the murder of pacifists, then their society or whoever taught them that is to blame, so yes, also a small piece of the humanity that formed them.

Society doesn't teach people to escape. It's *human nature* to do so.

Its not human nature to escape.If anything,its human nature to accept the status quo.

But that situation doesn't apply to the MACOs,who were sworn to uphold the orders of their superiors.By violating Hernandez's orders they committed mutiny,which would earn them life in a very dark cell back home.

Freedom or not,you don't violate your CO's orders.

 

[Fireflywyo300]

Society doesn't teach people to escape. It's *human nature* to do so.

Not really. That's what shows like ST like to say, that there's some inbuilt human instinct craving freedom, but the fact is, plent of people are content to be led and to live their lives within some greater or lesser degree of confinement. .

Incorrect. Human beings are STILL animals and we DO have a primal urge to be unrestrained and free just like any other animal. Since we have the ability to think about confinement or the nature of that confinement, our thoughts and actions start to feed that primal need to be free or oppose that which we think restricts us.

There IS something to be said about human nature.

 

[Fireflywyo300]

But those humans are a result of many things, thus there actions were. A person is in part genetic, in part their up-bringing. So if their society taught them to escape at all costs, that it was okay to risk the murder of pacifists, then their society or whoever taught them that is to blame, so yes, also a small piece of the humanity that formed them.

Lol. I just KNEW this perspective would come. Once again, this goes back to the black and white scenario. 99% of the people living on this Earth don't condone the murder of innocents. 99% of the people living today have a sense of morals, standards, and fairness when taken as individuals. Therefore, while horrible acts are often done by people who get caught up in massive events, most people generally try and foster positive qualities for both themselves and their society.

Do you really believe that the future society in which these characters lived really fostered the murder of pacifists? Or did that society, in general, and like our own, stress something better?

We know that they stressed the latter and as such, these acts were the acts of individuals who were not representative of humanity as a whole or what many define humanity as i.e. compassion, caring, and understanding for others.

Why do we always try and be relative? Why aren't things just simply black and white. Good vs bad. Why must we always try and connect dots between things when sometimes we should just stop and say "No. There is nothing beyond this. It is what it is and they are who they are."

 

[Silversmok3]

Society doesn't teach people to escape. It's *human nature* to do so.

Not really. That's what shows like ST like to say, that there's some inbuilt human instinct craving freedom, but the fact is, plent of people are content to be led and to live their lives within some greater or lesser degree of confinement. .

Incorrect. Human beings are STILL animals and we DO have a primal urge to be unrestrained and free just like any other animal. Since we have the ability to think about confinement or the nature of that confinement, our thoughts and actions start to feed that primal need to be free or oppose that which we think restricts us.

There IS something to be said about human nature.

Sorry to bust the bubble,but confinement is a part of modern life.Keep in mind this conversation about 'freedom' would be illegal in a majority of nations today.The status quo both overseas and throught history has been rule of humanity via autocratic law/government.

Even in the United States,exception that it is of a nation that represents freedom of government there is a trade off made.
Its not about primal urges,but choices.I don't have to go to work or drive the speed limit,but those choices have consequences that are worse than loosing my freedom from 9-5.

In a global sense,I'd be free to call the Iranian Ayatollah an assh#*@,but the likely conseqence being death I'd probably deal with my free speech being confined.

The problem is choice.I can call out the state and be killed or tortured,or keep my trap shut and live another day.

I can not go to work,but then I can't pay my bills.

In the MACO's case,they were free to either force escape via illegal and violent strategem,or play the long term plan as ORDERED to and escape without bloodshed.

All three cases are about choices.Primal urge is irrelevant.

 

[Marie1]

But those humans are a result of many things, thus there actions were. A person is in part genetic, in part their up-bringing. So if their society taught them to escape at all costs, that it was okay to risk the murder of pacifists, then their society or whoever taught them that is to blame, so yes, also a small piece of the humanity that formed them.

Lol. I just KNEW this perspective would come. Once again, this goes back to the black and white scenario. 99% of the people living on this Earth don't condone the murder of innocents. 99% of the people living today have a sense of morals, standards, and fairness when taken as individuals. Therefore, while horrible acts are often done by people who get caught up in massive events, most people generally try and foster positive qualities for both themselves and their society.

Do you really believe that the future society in which these characters lived really fostered the murder of pacifists? Or did that society, in general, and like our own, stress something better?

We know that they stressed the latter and as such, these acts were the acts of individuals who were not representative of humanity as a whole or what many define humanity as i.e. compassion, caring, and understanding for others.

Why do we always try and be relative? Why aren't things just simply black and white. Good vs bad. Why must we always try and connect dots between things when sometimes we should just stop and say "No. There is nothing beyond this. It is what it is and they are who they are."

I'm not saying its black and white- far from it. But do you expect me to believe that the society that formed Pembleton and those that followed him were from some benign happy fairy land and just in some animalistic fit they decided, while "confined" on a planet with pacifists who took excellent care of them that they magically decided to start blowing things up and shooting their own people? I don't think so.

And I don't buy that "people are animals and fight their way out of everything" because, if for no other reason (and there are other reasons) we can think more than animals can. We can reason. So the fact that the MACOs were willing to take action that influenced circumstances so that millions of Caeliar died, and the fact the thought of shooting Thayer even crossed their minds shows something in their learned behaviour that society put there which it shouldn't have. They must've been aggressive to begin with, and there must've been a willingness to go to violent lengths that not all people have.

And if there is any sort of fight-for-freedom no matter in what circumstances, no matter how many people I have to kill exists now- thats part of society- its unnatural, and shouldn't be there.

 

[Fireflywyo300]

But those humans are a result of many things, thus there actions were. A person is in part genetic, in part their up-bringing. So if their society taught them to escape at all costs, that it was okay to risk the murder of pacifists, then their society or whoever taught them that is to blame, so yes, also a small piece of the humanity that formed them.

Lol. I just KNEW this perspective would come. Once again, this goes back to the black and white scenario. 99% of the people living on this Earth don't condone the murder of innocents. 99% of the people living today have a sense of morals, standards, and fairness when taken as individuals. Therefore, while horrible acts are often done by people who get caught up in massive events, most people generally try and foster positive qualities for both themselves and their society.

Do you really believe that the future society in which these characters lived really fostered the murder of pacifists? Or did that society, in general, and like our own, stress something better?

We know that they stressed the latter and as such, these acts were the acts of individuals who were not representative of humanity as a whole or what many define humanity as i.e. compassion, caring, and understanding for others.

Why do we always try and be relative? Why aren't things just simply black and white. Good vs bad. Why must we always try and connect dots between things when sometimes we should just stop and say "No. There is nothing beyond this. It is what it is and they are who they are."

I'm not saying its black and white- far from it. [/quote]

I know you're not saying it's black and white. You're trying to connect too many dots. The actions of the MACO's were the actions of the MACO's. Not humanity as a whole. It's that simple. It's black and it's white.

[/quote]And I don't buy that "people are animals and fight their way out of everything" because, if for no other reason (and there are other reasons) we can think more than animals can. We can reason. [/quote]

I allowed for that in my previous post. We CAN reason. However, when we reason about things in our environment, when we reason that the environment may be restrictive to ourselves in an oppressive manner (as the crew did), it can multiply our anxiety and our need to escape. Sure, as thinking beings we will still may use REASON to enact our responses to that condition, but we're still reacting to our condition by impulse due to the anxiety it causes.

Simply, put, a claustrophobic can REASON that it's just a closet and that there is nothing to be afraid to be afraid off. However, the more he thinks of his situation, the more aware he is of it, it actually serves to make him MORE anxious and primal in his need to escape and get out of the situation.

I was merely arguing, that any human who has tasted freedom, (however they define it) and then suddenly finds themselves in a situation where they no longer have it, may react primal or aggressively in attempt to lash out or alter their circumstances. Sometimes, it IS human nature to react to certain circumstances and find a way to rationalize our way out of it. We may not always do it in the right manner however.

[/quote] So the fact that the MACOs were willing to take action that influenced circumstances so that millions of Caeliar died, and the fact the thought of shooting Thayer even crossed their minds shows something in their learned behaviour that society put there which it shouldn't have. They must've been aggressive to begin with, and there must've been a willingness to go to violent lengths that not all people have. [/quote]

Wow, well I guess we don't have free-will then. I might as well tell the nearest convict who PLANNED a home invasion, killed a family, and raped and killed a child, that it wasn't HIS fault. It's was society's.

No offense, but I don't buy that and I NEVER will.

[/quote] And if there is any sort of fight-for-freedom no matter in what circumstances, no matter how many people I have to kill exists now- thats part of society- its unnatural, and shouldn't be there.[/quote]

First of all, I didn't say NO matter the circumstances. I said it depends on how they reason their circumstances and how threatening they are to them as a being. However, we DO have a fight or flight reaction that is hard wired into our system and there are times, that it takes over and people do whatever is necessary to escape from a situation. That's the product of evolution. Just look at a cornered wild animal sometime.

 

[Marie1]

All I'm saying is that the MACOs actions came from somewhere, and that they had the free will to step back and say- yes, we're imprisonned, but ridiculously well treated, lets not blow the place up... but they did. Humans are in situations beyond their control all the time, most of them don't attack people- even in prison where the most violent people are. And you can't justify blowing up someone's city which isn't even the city they were on when they got stuck there. To me, its not an "animal cornered" situation so much as fencing in 5 square acres with some moose, then putting in a few raccoons. The raccoons aren't going to be so infuriated by those huge boundaries that they start attacking the moose. And the MACOs were considering mutiny before they even got to the Caeliar world, so its not as if being in the Caeliar world was that much of a push, if anything it was better than spending all that time on Columbia, esp. given what happened to it. The MACOs were in a dangerous line of work, one from which they knew it was possible their families would grow up without them. Even if they had escaped from the Caeliar world, without repairs, it would have taken them decades to get home anyway. Really, the situation was far better than they could have hoped for.

Are you trying to tell me that in their situation, you'd even consider doing what they did? I doubt it. I know I wouldn't. I may not like it there, I may complain about it, but not that. And I know it.

Take this story:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081212/national/crime_child_death

I hold the mother and the boyfriend or whatever he was directly responsible. But I also blame whatever in their society taught them that horrible, uncaring behaviour that is completely unnatural.

I also blame the neighbours, and family members, who I gather from other articles, knew what was happening, saw it for themselves, and did nothing. So a five year old girl with bones broken from her pelvis to her skull died alone on a cold concrete floor because society taught people that violence was okay, and that its better not to cause trouble and to mind your own business than to step up and save a life.

I'd suggest people start evolving a little better, and a little faster if thats the case (which I don't believe it is). Because I find that a lot of cornered, wild animals are still less insane that a freakish amount of people.

 

[Fireflywyo300]

All I'm saying is that the MACOs actions came from somewhere, and that they had the free will to step back and say- yes, we're imprisonned, but ridiculously well treated, lets not blow the place up... but they did.

Yes, it comes from somewhere but it DOES NOT mean that humanity as a whole, which started this thread, is to blame. It is individuals. I hope you understand what I'm saying.

Humans are in situations beyond their control all the time, most of them don't attack people- even in prison where the most violent people are.

No they, don't. I was just saying how SOME may react violently depending on how they process their circumstances.

And you can't justify blowing up someone's city which isn't even the city they were on when they got stuck there.

Lol. I NEVER justified their actions. Not once. I have two points to my thread. 1) Is it Humanity's fault? No.
2). In response to Mr. Bennett's and other posters regarding a humans NATURAL tendency to want to be free, which I believe we do. We just differ on what "freedom" means and if we put too much emphasis on one aspect of it and we feel that one aspect is denied to us, then people may often get desperate enough to resort to violence or barbarity. That's all I was saying.

To me, its not an "animal cornered" situation so much as fencing in 5 square acres with some moose, then putting in a few raccoons.

From ME, it wouldn't be an animal cornered situation, in this particular case that would break me down enough and make me desperate enough to go the violent lengths they did. For someone else, who puts emphasis on what's denied to them, then they may not respond well to their situation and may therefore panic, reason incorrectly, and take desperate actions. That DOESN'T mean that I'm condoning the desperate act of VIOLENCE they took.

And the MACOs were considering mutiny before they even got to the Caeliar world, so its not as if being in the Caeliar world was that much of a push, if anything it was better than spending all that time on Columbia, esp. given what happened to it. The MACOs were in a dangerous line of work, one from which they knew it was possible their families would grow up without them. Even if they had escaped from the Caeliar world, without repairs, it would have taken them decades to get home anyway. Really, the situation was far better than they could have hoped for.

I agree with you.

Are you trying to tell me that in their situation, you'd even consider doing what they did? I doubt it. I know I wouldn't. I may not like it there, I may complain about it, but not that. And I know it.

I would have RESISTED for sure. I may have even used limited force if possible. But I would have drawn the line at KILLING and maiming in this case.

Take this story:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081212/national/crime_child_death

I hold the mother and the boyfriend or whatever he was directly responsible. But I also blame whatever in their society taught them that horrible, uncaring behaviour that is completely unnatural.

I agree with you on the first point but I disagree with you on the second. When has modern SOCIETY taught them to have this behavior? I don't see it on TV, I don't see it taught in schools. Whatever these people learned, they learned from INDIVIDUALS but that does NOT constitute society as whole.

I also blame the neighbours, and family members, who I gather from other articles, knew what was happening, saw it for themselves, and did nothing. So a five year old girl with bones broken from her pelvis to her skull died alone on a cold concrete floor because society taught people that violence was okay, and that its better not to cause trouble and to mind your own business than to step up and save a life.

I'd suggest people start evolving a little better, and a little faster if thats the case (which I don't believe it is). Because I find that a lot of cornered, wild animals are still less insane that a freakish amount of people.

I may agree with on all the above. You're not one of those "kill the humans, save the planet" type of people are you? lol JK. However, you almost sound as if you're holding all of society responsible for these acts and not the immediate players.

If you are, even Star Trek shows us that human beings will ALWAYS be in conflict with themselves. Always try and "evolve" and with that, will always take steps forward on one path, and backstep sometimes on others.

Anyways, good discussion.

 

[Marie1]

All I'm saying is that the MACOs actions came from somewhere, and that they had the free will to step back and say- yes, we're imprisonned, but ridiculously well treated, lets not blow the place up... but they did.

Yes, it comes from somewhere but it DOES NOT mean that humanity as a whole, which started this thread, is to blame. It is individuals. I hope you understand what I'm saying.

Humans are in situations beyond their control all the time, most of them don't attack people- even in prison where the most violent people are.

No they, don't. I was just saying how SOME may react violently depending on how they process their circumstances.

Thats why I asked (I think it was in this thread) for partial blame of humanity. If we say no, then usually the discussion ends without looking at all the elements, as we're doing. If we just say yes, then we're missing your side- individuality, the reaction to being confined which is heightened by the Columbia's knowledge that they wouldn't see their families again. I know I'm stretching the definition of "humanity" instead of all of it, just aspects...

Lol. I NEVER justified their actions. Not once. I have two points to my thread. 1) Is it Humanity's fault? No.
2). In response to Mr. Bennett's and other posters regarding a humans NATURAL tendency to want to be free, which I believe we do. We just differ on what "freedom" means and if we put too much emphasis on one aspect of it and we feel that one aspect is denied to us, then people may often get desperate enough to resort to violence or barbarity. That's all I was saying.



From ME, it wouldn't be an animal cornered situation, in this particular case that would break me down enough and make me desperate enough to go the violent lengths they did. For someone else, who puts emphasis on what's denied to them, then they may not respond well to their situation and may therefore panic, reason incorrectly, and take desperate actions. That DOESN'T mean that I'm condoning the desperate act of VIOLENCE they took.



I agree with you.




I would have RESISTED for sure. I may have even used limited force if possible. But I would have drawn the line at KILLING and maiming in this case.

Take this story:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081212/national/crime_child_death

I hold the mother and the boyfriend or whatever he was directly responsible. But I also blame whatever in their society taught them that horrible, uncaring behaviour that is completely unnatural.

I agree with you on the first point but I disagree with you on the second. When has modern SOCIETY taught them to have this behavior? I don't see it on TV, I don't see it taught in schools. Whatever these people learned, they learned from INDIVIDUALS but that does NOT constitute society as whole.

I also blame the neighbours, and family members, who I gather from other articles, knew what was happening, saw it for themselves, and did nothing. So a five year old girl with bones broken from her pelvis to her skull died alone on a cold concrete floor because society taught people that violence was okay, and that its better not to cause trouble and to mind your own business than to step up and save a life.

I'd suggest people start evolving a little better, and a little faster if thats the case (which I don't believe it is). Because I find that a lot of cornered, wild animals are still less insane that a freakish amount of people.

I may agree with on all the above. You're not one of those "kill the humans, save the planet" type of people are you? lol JK. However, you almost sound as if you're holding all of society responsible for these acts and not the immediate players.

If you are, even Star Trek shows us that human beings will ALWAYS be in conflict with themselves. Always try and "evolve" and with that, will always take steps forward on one path, and backstep sometimes on others.

Anyways, good discussion.

LOL, no I'm not one of those. But since the Caeliar wouldn't kill anyone no matter what... I just find it too neat to to say yes/no blame humanity, and since there are "aspects" of humanity I blame with regard to the MACOs, I can't say no... does that make sense? Especially given the results of what the MACOs did... at least we can learn from it, go on... try and fix things. But I'd like to think that most of humanity is better than what the MACOs did, yet what the minority do gets worse and worse, closer to home, and even more innocents are being effected- like what happened in Destiny. Weird!