au1929 wrote:Ican
When did it become our obligation to right the wrongs of the world. Hell we can't even right the wrongs here at home. If the Iraqi people wanted freedom from Saddam it was their obligation not ours to fight for it. And now that we have freed them from their tyrant take a good look at the thanks we are getting.
Excellent question and comments.
What follows is my opinion. If there be evidence to support it, I'm currently unaware of it.
First, are all wrongs equal, or are some wrongs worse than others?
No, all wrongs are not equal. Murder is a worse wrong than theft, and theft is a worse wrong than lying. Genocide is worse than serial murder. Serial murder is worse than single murder. Single murder is worse than negligent murder.
Second, is it our obligation to right the wrongs of the world?
Yes. It has always been so. There has always been a conflict between those who perpetrate wrongs and those who attempt to rectify those wrongs regardless of the locations of the perpetrators and their victims.
Third, if yes, then to what or whom are we obligated?
We are obligated to ourselves. We are obligated to our posterity. We are also obligated to that intelligence, if one exists, that influenced and/or influences our evolution, .
Fourth, if no, then what are the consequences of not trying to right the wrongs of the world?
The world will dispense with our species. We either constantly increase the number of us rooting for one another to live long, healthy, honorably and prosperously, or we reduce the probability that we ourselves and our posterity will live long, healthy, honorably and prosperously.
Conclusion
It is in all our mutual self-interests to attempt to
right the wrongs of the world giving priority to those worst wrongs we
can rectify, and, as our capabilities and resources increase, rectify remaining wrongs.