!!Theoretical Question Time!!

[Fleurette]

I have a theoretical question for all of you!
I want you to analyze the question, and then answer / debate which of the two you believe is right.
GO!

There are two gods, and you can only choose one.
There is a god of salvation, and a god of destruction.
They both of their own strings attached.

The god of salvation cleanses the world of starvation, war, and natural disaster, but only saves white people. All of the people with different skin colours disappear forever.

The god of destruction destroys the world, all of us, everything we know, society etc. But the world is then reborn, and everybody is equal, much like the world of salvation, a happy society where there are is no sickness, war, starvation etc, only we have to sacrifice everything we know now, in order to achieve it.

Well? Which would you choose?

[zenia]

Destruction. No question... based on those strings.

[Temrin]

Destruction.

I wish that people could achieve a better life here without so much pain and destruction we've already caused. I do not understand why it is so hard for people to accept others and be -equal- and see others as equal on their own. But many people have their heads stuck so far up their butts that they cant see the bigger picture. Which is sad. and pathetic. imo. Anyways. i wont rant. Just my 2 cents.

[Drake Wingfire]

Strings are rather polarized I would say it comes down to ethnic cleansing or re-birth. Good and evil has pretty much become irrelevant lol.

If we save all the whites the world would be even more shit in some senses because there will always be hate, that hate would only shift from races to things like religions or sexual orientation in ever greater force than it is now. Sure there would be no war or environmental based issues. But you still got the same old people, now just with more reason to attack the more niche groups of their own race. So in short, no better off aside being hunger and disease free.

If the world is re-born well... you have lost much interest in that option because none of us would be there to see it, people want to see peace and an end to things bad, but if they are not even there to enjoy it then.. why? Of course there would be those who are far more self-sacrificing, but I think on average people would only want a happy re-birth like that if they themselves were re-born into it otherwise they would rather keep things like they are now and just try and work towards a better future the old fashioned way, IE 2 steps forward one step back.

[Wereman]

Choosing the god of destruction is too easy. There is a catch in it, for it is easy to choose that god if you are of a certain ethnic group.

[Sevrin]

Salvation, the reason is quite simple: both gods have the same outcome, everyone ends up being equal, but the god of salvation has less people die to reach that point, both choices lead to the same people dying, so those people are boned, but only one choice leads to some people not dying. Everyone seems to think the god of destruction is the better one, but I think they haven't considered the implications of such a choice, people are not reborn, the WORLD is, meaning everyone still dies. If the outcome is the same from both scenarios, the option that causes less death is the better choice, HOWEVER! if the destruction option leads to a BETTER world, then the choice becomes more complicated.

There are many other factors to consider, for example: How much destruction exactly is caused? Are all our advancements as a species destroyed as well? (you said it destroys everything we know) Are these new humans the same as us but with the parts of the brain responsible for discrimination and violence rewritten to exclude those? Do they lose all our technological advancement? if so how far back does technology go? Do they have to rediscover stuff like using sticks as tools and making fire? Do they have to re-evolve their brains? or are they of the same capacity as they were before? How does the REST of the world change? there are many more questions I could ask, this question you ask is not as simple as you make it seem, and your new world could end up dying before it begins.

[Fuzzum]

not to be a nagative Nancy but im sure the world can go with out a hole lot of people kinda over pop. as it is and in bad shape do to that so id have to got with destruction a new start and maybe a better tomarrow for the one's who are going to rebuild the future from scratch.

[Fleurette]

Salvation, the reason is quite simple: both gods have the same outcome, everyone ends up being equal, but the god of salvation has less people die to reach that point, both choices lead to the same people dying, so those people are boned, but only one choice leads to some people not dying. Everyone seems to think the god of destruction is the better one, but I think they haven't considered the implications of such a choice, people are not reborn, the WORLD is, meaning everyone still dies. If the outcome is the same from both scenarios, the option that causes less death is the better choice, HOWEVER! if the destruction option leads to a BETTER world, then the choice becomes more complicated.

There are many other factors to consider, for example: How much destruction exactly is caused? Are all our advancements as a species destroyed as well? (you said it destroys everything we know) Are these new humans the same as us but with the parts of the brain responsible for discrimination and violence rewritten to exclude those? Do they lose all our technological advancement? if so how far back does technology go? Do they have to rediscover stuff like using sticks as tools and making fire? Do they have to re-evolve their brains? or are they of the same capacity as they were before? How does the REST of the world change? there are many more questions I could ask, this question you ask is not as simple as you make it seem, and your new world could end up dying before it begins.

It's not supposed to be simple.
At least you figured that out.
More or less.
There isn't supposed to be a clear answer, this is just something to make people think, out of random curiosity.

[Zythren]

Destruction.
It's always the darkest before the dawn. :P

[Sevrin]

It's not supposed to be simple.
At least you figured that out.
More or less.
There isn't supposed to be a clear answer, this is just something to make people think, out of random curiosity.

It IS very simple, IF both scenarios have the same end result, if they do not, then the answer is very complicated and there are lots of things to consider.
IF both scenarios DO have the same end result, then the more moral option is to go with the one that results in the least amount of death.

[kohl]

I'd rather die and take out as many white people as I can.

[Sevrin]

That's a pretty mature way to look at it. *cough* *cough*

[kohl]

When your race is massively hunted and killed in there home by white people you lose your remorse for them.

[Nibi]

Alrighty kohl, what was the point of saying that?

[Fleurette]

I'd rather die and take out as many white people as I can.

This was incredibly negative, and did not need to be posted.
Please think before you post.