reply
I love this thread title.
I have only the most rudimentary acquaintance with any famous philosophers but a pretty thorough acquaintance with the bible, which I view more as "philsophy" than "how to avoid hell"...
Let your moderation be known to all men, that's a verse.
And it's funny, in Revelations, Jesus is addressing a "church" (that's just a gathering, beings called out of someplace and grouped together for whatever reason)...
And he says you are neither hot or cold but lukewarm therefore I spew you out of my mouth...
Well...I say neither hot or cold is moderate...heat is anger, neither give place to wrath...another "verse"...and cold is death...as David at 70, "gat no heat", they sent a young virgin to warm him up...worked, too...
But lukewarm...is Moderate, imo...
And...that big fish that swallowed Jonah...spewed him up on solid ground...maybe he had achieved luke-warmitude???
It would be fitting if a Big Fish taught men to be fishers of men...a very negative concept in Micah 7, the good man is perished, they hunt every man his brother with A NET...in Matt 10 we see identital wording, I have come not to bring peace but a sword and a man's enemies are the members of his own household.
You are asking if murder can ever be a moderate action.
I can only give "bible examples" but to me they have universal application...and I'm sure there are similar thoughts in other wisdom literature but I just don't know anything else that well.
Is anything worth dying for? Is anything worth killing for?
A mother will kill for her children's sake...and will die for them too...she doesn't even have to be a hero...there are exceptions but this is normal "mother behavior".
God speaking to "Jacob", fear not thou worm Jacob because you are precious to me I will give men for your life....
We are dying anyway...to think by somehow being very "moderate" we can avoid "death" is to never have any real life at all...
I think the moderate thing...is to spend one's mortal life as wisely as possible, with as large a return of what one believes is Worthy...as possible...and that would depend on each individual.
For some it's scientific discovery, for some it's being in the public limelight (Anna Nicole Smith?)...
Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with thy MIGHT, that is not moderate....to spend onself extragavantly...in service of the Beauty that you can envision...whatever it is...
I cannot imagine physically killing someone but I've struck down plenty with words...in the eternal realm it may be the same thing...
Getting a bit more moderate about that...live by the sword die by the sword...I want to live...and live to promote life not destroy it...
How Ironic that Christ is a symbol of both...for this cause Christ both died and rose and revived that he might be Lord, both of the Dead and the Living...
Evil is destroying life, Good is preserving, amplifying, freeing Life...
To set Life free...I guess you have to do some destruction, I don't know...
just rambling...sorry to offend those who despise the bible, I can understand believe me...but just wanted to try to make a connection anyway because the thread title was so lovely...
So much murder done of people's spirits, they know not what they do, not seeing the blood...
Murder can be carried out for a vast variety of reasons- some of them noble (moderate nobility?), some of them just, (moderate justice?). When designing a system of ethics, one cannot evaluate an action outside of the context the action is performed in without expecting a great deal of confusion and "what ifs". Context dropping is a very common falacy when people try to evaluate something in ethical terms. Instead of trying to fit the very broad concept of "murder" into ethical or non-ethical terms using the concept of "moderation", why don't we attack the very premise that "moderation" is a virtue?
While I can see why Aristotle and the gang would like to over-simplify many ethical problems by recommending moderation, I can also see that truth, justice, honor, and integrity are not better practiced in moderation. Nor is child molestation. So what is a better way of saying, "too much is just as bad as too little in many areas of life" without causing contradiction in areas that are better performed absolutely? (either absolutely yes or absolutely no.)
thethinkfactory wrote:Val - I am not sure.
If you walked up and slapped my son in the face - I would probably blast you in the grill. I am not sure as though that is immoderate.
Punching you in the face might seem immoderate - but I think the reaction could be argued to be moderation in the afformentioned case.
Thoughts?
TTF
What if I walked up and "moderately" slapped your son? Wouldn't I be practicing the virtue of moderation? Would my grill blast be any less severe?
I think we have a loaded question though. Moderation is moderation in any given case. It depends on the context of what my son did. If he just threw a rock through your windshield and you rocked him upside the head - I might still blast you in the grill - but I am not sure whether your reaction was immoderate.
I think mine, in that case, would not be.
TTF
I love the irony of trying to associate extreme actions such as son slapping and grill blasting with the concept of moderation- and then considering moderation in and of itself a virtue. But I would have to maintain that even moderation must be taken in moderation- that extreme actions must occasionally be taken for a variety of reasons- to escape boredom, to win the affection of others, to spice up life, to protect yourself.
Example:
I would much rather get absolutely funny-drunk once a month and not drink any alcohol in between than to limit myself to a single beer a night.
Example:
Thomas Edison took inventing to the extreme- which I would maintain was extremely virtuous.
nice topic
how bout them moderate mass murderers like sadam, bush, blair ?
