Toughest Philosophical Questions

I'm not denying anything; only your example of Hitler's actions as having any positive consequences.

"I thought Kim Jong Il was a god," she said. "After I came to South Korea I found that one South Korean's meal is more than a week's meals for a North Korean, and then I don't have illusions about him anymore."

You are now justifying the advance of medical science through their atrocious actions against other humans?

Some people just don't understand ethics, morals, humility, or humanity.

I am not saying that Hitler murdering millions of people had any positive consequences, but since you bring it up, there is one thing I can mention. Due to the Nazi's complete disregard of the rights of Jews and the minorities they targeted, they were able to advance medical science a lot faster than what would have been the case if they had followed ethical guidelines. I've been in one of the labs where they conducted their "experiments". It was in Sachsenhausen.
Hitler also improved the living standards of the German people. He didn't bully his way into power. They really liked him, you know.

German war dead, WWII

Wikipedia gives the total figure of German war dead in WWII as 7.5 million. Of these deaths, 5.5 million are given as military, and about 2 million as civilian. This last figure includes about 160,000 German Jews who perished in the Holocaust.
It seems that the article has gone for the minimum estimates under all headings and the real figure may be somewhat higher - closer to 8 million.

Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_Germans_died_in_World_War_2#ixzz1h8fjKz3K

You are now justifying the advance of medical science through their atrocious actions against other humans?

Many also liked (loved) Mao, Stalin, and Kim Jong Il. Liking a leader is about as blind as anyone can be when their leadership has led their own family and friends to starvation, murder, and inequality of treatment.

In Beijing, at the Forbidden City gate, there's a huge picture of Mao. Many still love him as their "leader." It's estimated that under Mao, he was responsible for some 70 million deaths.

Some people just don't understand ethics, morals, humility, or humanity.

Quote:

I'm not denying anything; only your example of Hitler's actions as having any positive consequences.

I haven't commented on the effects of Hitler's actions, only on his motives and intentions. By his standards, the actions he took were right. I don't agree with him, of course, but I understand how it works.

I am not saying that Hitler murdering millions of people had any positive consequences, but since you bring it up, there is one thing I can mention.
Due to the Nazi's complete disregard of the rights of Jews and the minorities they targeted, they were able to advance medical science a lot faster than what would have been the case if they had followed ethical guidelines. I've been in one of the labs where they conducted their "experiments". It was in Sachsenhausen.
Hitler also improved the living standards of the German people. He didn't bully his way into power. They really liked him, you know.

Quote:

I'm not denying anything; only your example of Hitler's actions as having any positive consequences.

I haven't commented on the effects of Hitler's actions, only on his motives and intentions. By his standards, the actions he took were right. I don't agree with him, of course, but I understand how it works.

I am not saying that Hitler murdering millions of people had any positive consequences, but since you bring it up, there is one thing I can mention.
Due to the Nazi's complete disregard of the rights of Jews and the minorities they targeted, they were able to advance medical science a lot faster than what would have been the case if they had followed ethical guidelines. I've been in one of the labs where they conducted their "experiments". It was in Sachsenhausen.
Hitler also improved the living standards of the German people. He didn't bully his way into power. They really liked him, you know.

Quote:

You are now justifying the advance of medical science through their atrocious actions against other humans?

That's what you got out of my post? No wonder we cannot agree... You don't understand basic English...

I am saying that the Nazis' disregard of ethical considerations in relation to medical experiments allowed them to progress faster than they would have if they'd followed ethical guidelines. This is not justification of any action, it's just a fact.

Quote:

Some people just don't understand ethics, morals, humility, or humanity.

Yes, and apparently, you are one of them. There is no absolute set of rules by which we decide if something is right or wrong.

What came first, the event or the sense of what is right or wrong? Or do they co-exist in the same 'space', and in simillar/disimillar times? Look, I don't doubt the existence of 'bad' stuff happening, but humans have an uncanny knack of interpreting things to suit themselves. For instance, in Pompei; when the the ash started falling from the sky upon the city from Mt. Vesuvius, most thought it was a 'good' sign from the 'gods' that they were blessed with such beautiful 'snow'. Only after the fact of Mt. Vesuvius's eruption did they realise how wrong they were.

How we see what is good and bad, right and wrong, does depend on the context but it is predominately shaped by how an individual formulates the information subjectively and sometimes we make these judgments on the whim of a situation. It is only because of past knowledge do we think we are discerning about what moral positions to take. But it is heinsight that makes us think what would of been the proper course of action.

I never claimed there were "set rules to morals."

Your assumption that "Hilter improved the living standards of the German
people" is highly questionable. Who's standard are you using to arrive at such a foolish conclusion?

Really??? He improved the living standards of the German people by causing so many of them to be killed, sterilizing so many of them, and bringing on a war that destroyed every major city in Germany along with most of its industrial capacity... By what standard do you measure such improvement???

Quote:

Really??? He improved the living standards of the German people by causing so many of them to be killed, sterilizing so many of them, and bringing on a war that destroyed every major city in Germany along with most of its industrial capacity... By what standard do you measure such improvement???

You too now? Hitler was elected to chancellor in 1933. In 1934 he became the fuhrer, and ruled until 1945. That's eleven years, and the war started in 1939. Before that he did a lot of things to help his people, and as I've been saying all along; he started the war with the belief that it would help his people.
You know the saying: power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I think it is a good thing to know a bit of history if you want to discuss these things...

Are you saying that a man who never did anything for the people, a man who everyone hated and thought was evil, was elected to political office? And I'm being foolish?

Summary
Hitler's rise to power was based upon long-term factors - resentment in the German people, the weakness of the Weimar system - which he exploited through propaganda (paid for by his rich, Communist-fearing backers), the terror of his stormtroopers, and the brilliance of his speeches.
During the 'roaring twenties' Germans ignored this vicious little man with his programme of hatred. But when the Great Depression ruined their lives, they voted for him in increasing numbers. Needing support, and thinking he could control Hitler, President Hindenburg made the mistake in January 1933 of giving Hitler the post of Chancellor.

I never said any such thing; that's all in your own imagination