We Shall Now Begin Ethics - Vol. 1 Ch. 3 - The Ideal Teacher
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 219
Jesus Christ, this series is shallow as an earfuck but it tries so hard to sell itself as something deep and insightful.
MD@Home
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2018
- Messages
- 644
When both the bully and the bullied did something bad, then we are likely talking about two things, which should not be mixed together. Bullying, by definition, is bad and should be stopped, since it refers to someone misusing their strength/influence against someone who can't realistically fight back. What started the bullying does not excuse it in any way; whether the bullied person actually did something bad beforehand is irrelevant as far as the bullying is concerned. Only when that was stopped, can we separately look at the issue that came earlier.
The thought process of "yeah, you were bullied but you're not innocent either" is mostly used to turn a blind eye on the whole thing, it gives a valid-looking excuse to avoid facing a complicated problem. The teachers resorting to it should be ashamed.
The thought process of "yeah, you were bullied but you're not innocent either" is mostly used to turn a blind eye on the whole thing, it gives a valid-looking excuse to avoid facing a complicated problem. The teachers resorting to it should be ashamed.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2018
- Messages
- 600
@TucoBenedicto yea its pretty damn bad, you can see what they are trying to do but it misses every beat, hell a rape in school with students still in school, theres a limit to stupidity, hell i bet they even come back to school and try again
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2018
- Messages
- 56
Fed-Kun's army
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2018
- Messages
- 372
@chaser
People laugh about ethics because they fail to realize they've been "schooled" by societal standards or they've already come to their own conclusions about morality. Your own feelings will not line up perfectly with society, which is way Man vs Society is a trope for conflict.
It isn't that smokers are bad people, but the whole concept of judging people to be either good or bad in totality is nonsense. Smoking hurts the user through chemical imbalance (physical addiction and physical damage to lungs), the bystander through toxic fumes, and the environment. The sole benefit is a coping mechanism and stress reliever which only works because the user believes that smoking is a coping mechanism or stress reliever. Smoking, as an action, is bad, but people are not evil spawns of Satan for smoking.
"from the author,he is NOT going to make a 'Sakamoto' here,he wanted to show a teacher who maybe good at teaching but also has his flaws ,hes not perfect but why does that make him bad?"
My issue with this is that it has been done before in better ways. My issue with the manga itself is that you already know the lesson being taught. You questioning good and bad with different perspectives.
"he save a student and hes a smoker does that smoke make him bad?,does saving person make him good? then what kind of person is he?
You perfectly summarized 3 chapters in a few sentences. You aren't gaining anything from continued reading; you already got the message.
Personally, I think the author is masturbating to the idea of being an "intellectual" when the stories sound like a highschool writing prompt in ethics class. It fits the theme, but it doesn't make it good.
People laugh about ethics because they fail to realize they've been "schooled" by societal standards or they've already come to their own conclusions about morality. Your own feelings will not line up perfectly with society, which is way Man vs Society is a trope for conflict.
It isn't that smokers are bad people, but the whole concept of judging people to be either good or bad in totality is nonsense. Smoking hurts the user through chemical imbalance (physical addiction and physical damage to lungs), the bystander through toxic fumes, and the environment. The sole benefit is a coping mechanism and stress reliever which only works because the user believes that smoking is a coping mechanism or stress reliever. Smoking, as an action, is bad, but people are not evil spawns of Satan for smoking.
"from the author,he is NOT going to make a 'Sakamoto' here,he wanted to show a teacher who maybe good at teaching but also has his flaws ,hes not perfect but why does that make him bad?"
My issue with this is that it has been done before in better ways. My issue with the manga itself is that you already know the lesson being taught. You questioning good and bad with different perspectives.
"he save a student and hes a smoker does that smoke make him bad?,does saving person make him good? then what kind of person is he?
You perfectly summarized 3 chapters in a few sentences. You aren't gaining anything from continued reading; you already got the message.
Personally, I think the author is masturbating to the idea of being an "intellectual" when the stories sound like a highschool writing prompt in ethics class. It fits the theme, but it doesn't make it good.
@Uvenam
"Smoking, as an action, is bad, but people are not evil spawns of Satan for smoking. "
-That right there is what i forget to mention when i wrote that(sorry)
its not the people we should hate,its the action
"People laugh about ethics because they fail to realize they've been "schooled" by societal standards or they've already come to their own conclusions about morality. Your own feelings will not line up perfectly with society, which is way Man vs Society is a trope for conflict"
-i don't get this one can you explain this further
"You questioning good and bad with different perspectives. "
-ah yes ,i guess i did(sorry,i was wrong )
"You aren't gaining anything from continued reading; you already got the message."
-i kinda wanted to see how he solve people problem in his own way,not saying he is right but its fun to watch how he try solving people problem in his perspective
"Personally, I think the author is masturbating to the idea of being an "intellectual" when the stories sound like a highschool writing prompt in ethics class. It fits the theme, but it doesn't make it good."
-Yeah i dont think him as some very intellectual figure but rather a teacher who try his best to solve other people problem by using Ethics XD
"Smoking, as an action, is bad, but people are not evil spawns of Satan for smoking. "
-That right there is what i forget to mention when i wrote that(sorry)
its not the people we should hate,its the action
"People laugh about ethics because they fail to realize they've been "schooled" by societal standards or they've already come to their own conclusions about morality. Your own feelings will not line up perfectly with society, which is way Man vs Society is a trope for conflict"
-i don't get this one can you explain this further
"You questioning good and bad with different perspectives. "
-ah yes ,i guess i did(sorry,i was wrong )
"You aren't gaining anything from continued reading; you already got the message."
-i kinda wanted to see how he solve people problem in his own way,not saying he is right but its fun to watch how he try solving people problem in his perspective
"Personally, I think the author is masturbating to the idea of being an "intellectual" when the stories sound like a highschool writing prompt in ethics class. It fits the theme, but it doesn't make it good."
-Yeah i dont think him as some very intellectual figure but rather a teacher who try his best to solve other people problem by using Ethics XD
@cheser @Uvenam
Grilling/frying food is just as dangerous to health as smoking, they both generated loads of carcinogenic compounds due to "incomplete combustion of organic matter". The common culprit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbon
So you would be very hypocritical if you believed that smoking is evil/good, but that grilling and frying are totally fun and cool (exactly like how smoking was viewed some 50 years ago). You'd be just as much of a victim of social conditioning as the smokers who can't quit their habits
IF you have already banned grilled and fried food in your house, and complained to everyone about the danger of grilling/frying, then I congratulate you, and wish you a long and happy life.
Oh btw, motor engine gives off the same carcinogenic stuffs, so driving is evil too.
Grilling/frying food is just as dangerous to health as smoking, they both generated loads of carcinogenic compounds due to "incomplete combustion of organic matter". The common culprit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbon
So you would be very hypocritical if you believed that smoking is evil/good, but that grilling and frying are totally fun and cool (exactly like how smoking was viewed some 50 years ago). You'd be just as much of a victim of social conditioning as the smokers who can't quit their habits
IF you have already banned grilled and fried food in your house, and complained to everyone about the danger of grilling/frying, then I congratulate you, and wish you a long and happy life.
Oh btw, motor engine gives off the same carcinogenic stuffs, so driving is evil too.
Fed-Kun's army
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2018
- Messages
- 372
@chaser
I apologize for the long response, though I would like to explain in depth.
"-i kinda wanted to see how he solve people problem in his own way,not saying he is right but its fun to watch how he try solving people problem in his perspective"
You do you, don't let my rants stop you. No need to apologize either, I'm sorry if I've been rude in my comments.
"-Yeah i dont think him as some very intellectual figure but rather a teacher who try his best to solve other people problem by using Ethics"
The story will probably flow better once more chapters are out, so lets see who is right :3
@HolyDemon
I want a greener world, and we need a greener world. That is why we walk towards our ideals; we are not there yet. I do not grill nor fry, nor smoke, and I would love to bike. Except that you cannot bike on the highways and my job requires the usage of a two-stroke engine. I would love for my family to not smoke or grill, except that they are unfortunately victims of social conditioning. I do think that there are large differences between smoking, grilling, and motor engines that make the equation of them seem biased.
I apologize for the long response, though I would like to explain in depth.
Interestingly enough, teacher puts it best with "You might think Ethics is optional in life, but in reality, its compulsory." You already absorb what good and bad are through your developing years. Hurting others is wrong because you've been taught that it is wrong. You didn't have a choice in learning whether or not harming others is wrong because you've already been taught. So when someone ponders "Is it wrong to harm?" it can be compared to someone poorly singing a song off the radio that you've memorized for the simple reason of it is always on the radio. Why are they questioning a basic fact? The study of ethics is more broad and can focus on justifying harming others through various reasons. It is okay to harm bullies, for example, to protect the weak. If you don't have an opinion on this, you quickly form an opinion because it is what you feel. Your opinion comes from your own mind, so its based on your experiences and rarely on your conscious thoughts. Morality and feeling are closely linked; you feel uncomfortable breaking your moral values mainly because humans are social creatures and it is a chemical process to help you survive. To prevent your mind from killing itself, the mind justifies actions. For example: It is wrong for someone to steal, except when they are stealing medicine for their sick relatives. Whenever someone studies ethics, they go through this process of questioning and building off their personal findings. You will judge someone else differently than you judge yourself for the same action, so it becomes wasted time to closely follow the study of ethics for the sake of studying ethics. Ethics is observing your own morals so that you can try to consciously better yourself. Here is the reason why ethics quickly becomes a laughable topic: The people wanting to better themselves are already studying ethics without a class or teacher, while the people content with their own values have no need to study them.
"-i kinda wanted to see how he solve people problem in his own way,not saying he is right but its fun to watch how he try solving people problem in his perspective"
You do you, don't let my rants stop you. No need to apologize either, I'm sorry if I've been rude in my comments.
"-Yeah i dont think him as some very intellectual figure but rather a teacher who try his best to solve other people problem by using Ethics"
The story will probably flow better once more chapters are out, so lets see who is right :3
@HolyDemon
I want a greener world, and we need a greener world. That is why we walk towards our ideals; we are not there yet. I do not grill nor fry, nor smoke, and I would love to bike. Except that you cannot bike on the highways and my job requires the usage of a two-stroke engine. I would love for my family to not smoke or grill, except that they are unfortunately victims of social conditioning. I do think that there are large differences between smoking, grilling, and motor engines that make the equation of them seem biased.
@Uvenam
thanks for the long answer and My thats long,what i understand is that people learn ethics throughout its life and so people wont need to be teach about it.
the internet is full of unethical things,memes and some sort is more usually to express something(sometime) serious using jokes and most of the things have hidden meanings or sudden twist that isn't normal that make people laugh,some twist or hidden meaning is unethical and people know its not true or its not how it supposed to turn out but if this thing become a normal occurrence ,people would start to think thats its normal to be unethical.
example would be making dirty jokes using memes in a general social media,try to stop them in comments about how unethical it is ,you see most of the comment would be against you even though you are just,being ethical is being criticize by people who said to be 'people who learn know ethics'
i dont know if you could understand what i am trying to say(with my limited vocabulary) but basically netizen is being unethical is norm and what do you suggest to stop it?
thanks for the long answer and My thats long,what i understand is that people learn ethics throughout its life and so people wont need to be teach about it.
the internet is full of unethical things,memes and some sort is more usually to express something(sometime) serious using jokes and most of the things have hidden meanings or sudden twist that isn't normal that make people laugh,some twist or hidden meaning is unethical and people know its not true or its not how it supposed to turn out but if this thing become a normal occurrence ,people would start to think thats its normal to be unethical.
example would be making dirty jokes using memes in a general social media,try to stop them in comments about how unethical it is ,you see most of the comment would be against you even though you are just,being ethical is being criticize by people who said to be 'people who learn know ethics'
i dont know if you could understand what i am trying to say(with my limited vocabulary) but basically netizen is being unethical is norm and what do you suggest to stop it?
Fed-Kun's army
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2018
- Messages
- 372
@chaser
Moderating the general social media to clean the conversation. People choose to immerse themselves in the internet, but there has to be a way to keep the discussion focused. Any forum or media without some form of moderation often devolves into trolling or nonsense. If a party does not have any rules, the house will get trashed.
Informing the netizen seems like it doesn't need to happen, since the internet is a great source of information. Except that is rarely the case. It is easy to go off course from facts when you only talk with people who speculate and theorize. The constant stream of unethical jokes can go from being funny to being serious when people forget that the jokes are just meant to be funny. This is a tricky thing to do when moderation is weak. If moderation is weak, then discussions will separate from being just jokes and be derailed.
Separating people from their deep immersion fixes the problem because it is how the problem came to be in the first place. They immerse themselves in the common culture, or the general social norms, that they were following before being immersed in dirty jokes. A popular saying is "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" or "Adapt to your surroundings". If you want people to become themselves, you have to readapt them to their old surroundings (in the idiom of "when in Rome", you would remove them from Rome. There is no reason to act Roman when you are no longer in Rome).
The largest issue with trying to solve people becoming unethical through online immersion is that people choose to be immersed in those certain communities and choose to be unethical. The most obvious answer is to spend less time online and to spend more time in person with others, but the same problem can arise. The dirty jokes and twisted meanings are everywhere, even among real people. So spending less time online won't necessarily solve the issue if they aren't also given their old reference points.
Sorry again for the length
Right. Imagine that you were born in a forest with 2 parents, and that the only people you've met or spoken with were your parents. You would learn your ethics through them because they are your only reference points. In a larger community, your ethics are shaped by family and society. You would have two different sets of ethics when living a survivalist life in a forest versus living a communal life in a city. With the internet, being online is like being in a community and your ethics can be shaped through online immersion.
I think I do, hopefully you are able to translate what I mean. I think three things would solve this issue. Moderation, Information, and Separation.
Moderating the general social media to clean the conversation. People choose to immerse themselves in the internet, but there has to be a way to keep the discussion focused. Any forum or media without some form of moderation often devolves into trolling or nonsense. If a party does not have any rules, the house will get trashed.
Informing the netizen seems like it doesn't need to happen, since the internet is a great source of information. Except that is rarely the case. It is easy to go off course from facts when you only talk with people who speculate and theorize. The constant stream of unethical jokes can go from being funny to being serious when people forget that the jokes are just meant to be funny. This is a tricky thing to do when moderation is weak. If moderation is weak, then discussions will separate from being just jokes and be derailed.
Separating people from their deep immersion fixes the problem because it is how the problem came to be in the first place. They immerse themselves in the common culture, or the general social norms, that they were following before being immersed in dirty jokes. A popular saying is "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" or "Adapt to your surroundings". If you want people to become themselves, you have to readapt them to their old surroundings (in the idiom of "when in Rome", you would remove them from Rome. There is no reason to act Roman when you are no longer in Rome).
The largest issue with trying to solve people becoming unethical through online immersion is that people choose to be immersed in those certain communities and choose to be unethical. The most obvious answer is to spend less time online and to spend more time in person with others, but the same problem can arise. The dirty jokes and twisted meanings are everywhere, even among real people. So spending less time online won't necessarily solve the issue if they aren't also given their old reference points.
When the norm changes, the conversation changes. Two issues with trying to stop them from being unethical in the comments is that they know that they are joking and/or they don't see themselves as being unethical. If they know that they are joking, then they don't want to be taken seriously and do not want to be corrected. If they do not see themselves as being unethical, then they don't care about being unethical. They think that they are right, even if others view them as wrong.
Sorry again for the length
Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2019
- Messages
- 83
love everyone, no exceptions
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2019
- Messages
- 29
Just shoot 'em.
-Sam Hyde
-Sam Hyde
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 23, 2018
- Messages
- 3,096
good shit, nice overlapping/non-linear story structure.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2019
- Messages
- 19
@criver There's plenty of depth to bullying. Why were they a bully in the first place? Are they projecting this because it happens to themselves? Do people do it as a group because it allows them to fit in with the rest and gives them some form of identity? If you were ever bullied, take a step back and see where you ended up fitting in the equation. I felt like i was bullied all my life. The usual being beaten up, called names, rumors spread about me, throwing shit at me when they see me. But I was also a bully. I picked on my little brother, made him feel worthless, fought with him knowing full well I was bigger. And even in school, i was a nerdy geek but I wasn't bottom of the rung. There were people who were i thought were weirder, less social, and dumber than me and I would talk shit about them like people had done to me. Everyone does it, and if you still really think you're that above it all, I'd applaud you because you're a saint and probably one in tens of thousands, you special snowflake, you.
@Ikkakun
You really don't have to care why. There are a million reasons - none of which are justified. There's no reason why anybody has to put up with spoiled brats - you discipline spoiled brats if you get the chance. After they get disciplined enough times they come to understand this is not generally considered acceptable behaviour.
No offence intended, but I don't care about your life story or how you justified bullying/getting bullied.
Applaud me all you want, but I am neither a saint nor one in ten thousand. I just had a "normal" upbringing, not unlike many other people.
You really don't have to care why. There are a million reasons - none of which are justified. There's no reason why anybody has to put up with spoiled brats - you discipline spoiled brats if you get the chance. After they get disciplined enough times they come to understand this is not generally considered acceptable behaviour.
No offence intended, but I don't care about your life story or how you justified bullying/getting bullied.
Applaud me all you want, but I am neither a saint nor one in ten thousand. I just had a "normal" upbringing, not unlike many other people.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2019
- Messages
- 19
@criver No, point i'm getting at is that at some point or other, you were likely a bully like any other. I'm not trying to justify myself or anyone else for doing it, I'm just saying, you can't say that you're one of the normal ones that don't bully, when in fact the vast majority of normal people have been unknowingly bullies in one way or another. You call these kids spoiled brats, but who are you to be the one to be judge and jury on that? Group of kids messing around with you, so you single one out and then fight them to make them stop. Who's to say that from another perspective, you don't just look like some kid who overreacted and resorted to violence over a harmless joke? And even if they are beating down on you to begin with, is there literally no other way to handle it? Violence begets more violence. Who's to say they won't just gang up on you later and beat the shit out of you as a group and even worse the next time? Bullying, like plenty of other things in life, is too complicated to just paint in black and white.
Similar threads
