I place great weight on a person's ability to separate opinion from fact.
Let me ramble a bit on this. Imagine if you will me telling you , I saw a dog being killed. Without more information on the context, can you pass judgement of any sort? Yes, you may. From my emotions from my expression. from our shared history (chats, encounters, SHARED) you may have gleaned something about me. But let's remove that. remove all traces of me. let's say this was over that chat program you can chat with anons.
'I saw a dog being killed.'
Where? at the butcher or the vet
Again removing all traces with me, of the actors, we may use this new piece of information to surmise (correct? was there evidence?) that the act of killing was good or bad for the dog. But even with this conclusion, you should ever hold within yourself (given limited interaction on all rounds) the probability that it may have been the other way round. Was the butcher or vet brutal? Who were the beneficiaries here? Who said anything about the butcher or the vet being the one who laid the hand? Could they have been the audience?
I am told Buddhists release animals in captivity on Vesak Day as an act of mercy and kindness and probably to earn merit for the afterlife. Let's say we have doves which were bred for such an act. So they really are domestic doves. If I were to buy a domestic dove and release it before a crowd of 100 Buddhists. I presumably become a kind person to them. If on Vesak Day, I released a dove that had been captured from the wild by a neighbour only the day before. And some animal rights activist saw me. I presumably become ignominiously selfish in his eye.
Fact: I released a dove from captivity on Vesak Day.
Opinion: I am a kind and merciful person. I led a defenseless dove to its early and unwarranted death.
The dangers of always resorting / returning to grey areas is obvious -- how else will we make a decision if there is always something pulling us in the both directions? You get accused of sitting on the fence. But that is what the context is about. Depending on the context, with the given information, you make a decision, a choice. The path you choose for yourself may differ from the path you would set for another person, if only you had that other choice or influence (but thankfully you don't and never should have that kind of dictatorial -- brings to mind the old Malay kingdoms. I forgot the word).
Let me ramble a bit on this. Imagine if you will me telling you , I saw a dog being killed. Without more information on the context, can you pass judgement of any sort? Yes, you may. From my emotions from my expression. from our shared history (chats, encounters, SHARED) you may have gleaned something about me. But let's remove that. remove all traces of me. let's say this was over that chat program you can chat with anons.
'I saw a dog being killed.'
Where? at the butcher or the vet
Again removing all traces with me, of the actors, we may use this new piece of information to surmise (correct? was there evidence?) that the act of killing was good or bad for the dog. But even with this conclusion, you should ever hold within yourself (given limited interaction on all rounds) the probability that it may have been the other way round. Was the butcher or vet brutal? Who were the beneficiaries here? Who said anything about the butcher or the vet being the one who laid the hand? Could they have been the audience?
I am told Buddhists release animals in captivity on Vesak Day as an act of mercy and kindness and probably to earn merit for the afterlife. Let's say we have doves which were bred for such an act. So they really are domestic doves. If I were to buy a domestic dove and release it before a crowd of 100 Buddhists. I presumably become a kind person to them. If on Vesak Day, I released a dove that had been captured from the wild by a neighbour only the day before. And some animal rights activist saw me. I presumably become ignominiously selfish in his eye.
Fact: I released a dove from captivity on Vesak Day.
Opinion: I am a kind and merciful person. I led a defenseless dove to its early and unwarranted death.
The dangers of always resorting / returning to grey areas is obvious -- how else will we make a decision if there is always something pulling us in the both directions? You get accused of sitting on the fence. But that is what the context is about. Depending on the context, with the given information, you make a decision, a choice. The path you choose for yourself may differ from the path you would set for another person, if only you had that other choice or influence (but thankfully you don't and never should have that kind of dictatorial -- brings to mind the old Malay kingdoms. I forgot the word).
No comments:
Post a Comment