"There are certainly "moral" systems that make, or try to make, arguments based on empirical observations, but so far, the only thing I can see is are condemnations based on personal preferences." - Tsukubus
Well excuse me for having a personal preference for moral standards that make it wrong to get other people in trouble for things they didn't do. The logic speaks for itself; that is harmful to others. Pointing out flaws in popular notions of morality as an excuse to ignore the obvious implications of the evil you do will not make this point go away.
Being fasley accused of a crime sucks - and in certain circumstances, it's a crime, too. They can call it Wounded Gazelle Gabit and whitewash it all they want, it's still sucks. You knowingly falsely accuse me of say, sexually assaulting you, you comitted a crime by knowingly doing so. It gets proven you did so, you get punished, not me.
So yes, I'm in total agreeance with Neo YT Pism on this.
Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.I’m siding with Tsukubus on the matter that morality isn’t very important. If I weighed the chances and decided that doing something morally questionable that I knew I had a reasonable chance of getting away with would benefit me either immediately or in the long run, I would do it. However, I always try to avoid negatively affecting other people, especially if I don’t know if they deserve it/ they’re my friends. Therefore, I don’t use the Wounded Gazelle Gambit. However, as I just said, I will break rules. Does this make me a bad person? I would say so. Do I care? Absolutely not. I learned the hard way that playing dirty is pretty much the only way to avoid being a victim of other people that play dirty. Is this considered a legitimate excuse by the same people that expect me to follow the rules? No. Once again, do I care? No.
Warm hugs and morally questionable advice given here. Prosey BitchfestLook. Most people are quite selfish. Everyone at least cares more about themselves than a random stranger. I understand that. I'm pretty selfish too. But I do object to trying to use moral relativism to defend yourself and your unethical actions. Just admit that you aren't perfect. I would rather not use this gambit myself, but I understand that you might. But it's still unethical, and nothing you tell us or yourself is going to change that.
Argh. I'm having trouble finding things to say that don't deal with you and your personalities directly.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.^^ You have a point, though I'm not sure how much longer I can survive if I start being ethical. I rest my case.
Warm hugs and morally questionable advice given here. Prosey Bitchfest"But yeah, I've never been able to pull these off effectively" - Joseiph
Wait, something you consider a Moral Event Horizon is something you have attempted yourself?
edited 11th Jan '11 9:03:41 PM by neoYTPism
Maybe now but back then...
And it's spelled "Josieph". >:/
edited 11th Jan '11 9:48:25 PM by SandJosieph
How do people even get away with it? I've never fallen for one, so is everyone I know a bad actor?
Warm hugs and morally questionable advice given here. Prosey BitchfestPeople rely on me to judge character for some reason, so some other person will try to pull it off to convince me a certain person is a douchebag. There's nothing really different from the example on the trope page, though. I just go with my gut and ask a few questions and I get it right. Maybe I've had too much practice as a lie detector.
Warm hugs and morally questionable advice given here. Prosey Bitchfest@OP: The Wounded Gazelle is just another species of the genus Elektra passiveagressivus ("professional victim"), a portion of humanity I despise on principle. It's a lot of bullshit, and the fact that it's common only makes it worse.
If I were to write some of the strange things that come under my eyes they would not be believed. ~Cora M. Strayer~"Maybe now but back then..." - Josieph
You do know Moral Event Horizon refers to the first evil deed to prove one IRREDEEMABLE, right? o.o
IMO, the wounded gazelle gambit is as right or wrong as more straightforward violence. It shouldn't happen in the playground, the workplace or the soccer pitch but sometimes it does, and it should be stopped. Bad guys do it and good guys (and you) might too if there's no other way of righting a wrong. Your little brother probably did it to you because you were bigger than him so he couldn't just thump you.
But good old fashioned violence has a better reputation - like other forms of manipulation we distrust those that do it - we like our heroes direct and tough, not sneaky.
Although of course the gambit works IRL, I think it works a lot more often in fiction. It's more dramatic that way, plus the most effective way to counter it is conflict mediation, which is boooooring!
Neo, are you going to go Knight Templar on us and berate us for our sinful lives? This thread isn't about morality. It's about Wounded Gazelles and any morality has to be closely related to it.
Warm hugs and morally questionable advice given here. Prosey Bitchfest"Bad guys do it and good guys (and you) might too if there's no other way of righting a wrong." - betaalpha
Are you implying that the ends justify the means?
Oh, and snowfoxofdeath, the morality IS connected, because it was in response to Tsukubus' rationalizations for these kinds of manipulative tactics.
Just checking. I thought we were starting to drift a little too far.
Warm hugs and morally questionable advice given here. Prosey BitchfestRules and laws are something entirely made by people, mere social constructs. They have no inherent legitimacy by simple being "the law". Of course, obeying the law tends to promote personal well-being, but not always. "Law" is merely something humans invent to exert power onto others. There's no difference from suing someone on false basis and winning cash and say, using a program funded by money the state has coerced from his pocket.
"I didn't steal it; I'm borrowing it until I die."Your views make me laugh. Consider the possibility, if far more people had your mindset, we'd be happy living in small agrarian-based (or even hunter-gatherer) societies to this day, as large populations of people would be totally unfeasible without those social constructs called laws and rules and stuff.
Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.Hammunrabi would disagree "To promote justice in the land so the strong shall not harm the weak" is right at the very forefront of his little code.
Your casual way of saying "I don't need your stupid things, I can do it my way" is probably going to end up biting you in the asshole so hard that it will cause it to concave.

It all depends upon your level of native empathy. If you happen to observe someone injuring themselves, do you flinch? If you cause someone harm, do you feel bad on their behalf? If so, then causing harm is bad, whether or not you get caught or experience more benefits than costs. On the other hand, people who experience very low levels of empathy don't understand what the issue is, and probably cant be argued with.
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.