Conflict with Killing

Alright, so this is my first post here and I’m unsure about how things work on this forum or if I even posted this question in the right place. Cut me a little slack if things are not developed in enough detail; after all, how can an amatuer in philosophy-posting become an expert without making a fool of himself at the beginning? Anyway here’s the main reason for the post.

I am in training to become an officer in the military. This means that I spend a considerable amount of time analyzing battles, tactics, strategy and footage from different eras and locations. The images of death and carnage do not seem to phaze me a great deal. Essentially, I am totally immersed in the bussiness of whole-sale murder. The philisophical question I’ve been struggling with is this:

I have dedicated my entire future, by my own free will, to the systematic destruction of other people. I am excited about going to war and using my training. All my life all I have wanted to do was lead men into battle and kill an enemy. However, I’m afraid that I must be a monster for not feeling repulsed or guilty about taking a life. Worse even, I must want to do it or I would have picked a different career. But if someone feels bad about not feeling guilty, then can they really be an evil person?

The problem is that if I feel remorse about not reacting the way society has universally dictated is morally sound, then am I truly immoral even if I am remaining true to myself? How can I be morally sound if my own ideas so radically conflict with what seems to be a global truth? I figure that if I have such questions, that others must as well. Hopefully someone here can offer some sort of insight, as you have dedicated yourselves to analyzing such matters.

This post seems fake to me.

Why would you post this at all if you didn’t feel guilty. You would not have thought of the question at all.

Welcome to the boards Rek, I hope Alderian hasn’t already discouraged you… Shame on you Alderian, your post wasn’t very insightfull! Anyways, Rek, I think you will find few people here that would consider you a monster… Thats because I think we make it a buisness here to try to understand before we impart judgements. And more importantly, as has been the theme around here lately, we try to understand the standards with which we judge in the first place.

One of those standards is morality. Good and Evil. You apear to have generally the classic, socialy accepted view of morallity. But I think here you will find few people who would judge you by those standards as you have judged yourself. Thats because if you actually think about morality, you will realize just how arbitrary the common folk’s morality really is. It is my opinion that the feelings of repulsion one may experience in the presence of “evil” or the feelings of pleasure one may experience in the presence of “good” or the “virtuous” is nothing but socially programmed associations in your head. This bassicly means that your parents constantly repeated that “murder is bad” and would enact some form of negative consequence for an association to be born between the “bad” and pain. Ever seen A Clockwork Orange? Its just a minor form of that. So its arbitrary because it just depends on your circumstances throughout life, mostly early in life. This is what determines the feelings you will have towards all aspects of the world.

Ofcourse theres a reason that we share so many of these associations, in that so many of us feel that murder is “wrong.” This is simply because such morals obviously are beneficial for the survival and prosperity of a society. Its inevitable that such standards would arise and that we would succumb to them, the alternative is anarchy. But think about what this means. Society said so, and thats why you may feel the ideal is to be repulsed by murder. But is that really a good reason? The problems so many people encounter is that:

A. The association is just too strong. Bassicly means your parents drilled those morals into you damn deep, and it has become like instinct. Theres almost nothing to question and consider, its just a part of you. Killing is just “wrong”

B. The reasons given for why “murder is wrong” are dependant on other beliefs that are hard wired into the brain, like God.

So, if you are one of these two, than consideration and questioning will be tough for you. But since you are here asking these questions, I expect you are willing to philosophize and consider every angle of your beliefs. I hope this is true…

Since morality exists to protect society, you must consider exactly how the whole process works. Society has always and will always strive to create perfect social robots so to say, people who suffer from option A above. People who need not think about WHY murder is wrong, they just avoid it. This would infact create the best circumstances for survival of the society and also the individuals within. But what of those that choose to question, and seek rationale for such standards? What reason is there to benefit society? Why aply to those standards? Well because it helps you too. Simple as that. Because you, as an individual are better off in a society where murder is a negative. And this is the key! The individual desire is the reason. The only reason that could justify murder as being wrong would be your own personal desire. Its the only reason for everything! So the rational basis behind your acceptance of Society’s rules is your individual preferance. This is very important, because it hands YOU the reigns. No longer should you consider such things as:

“How can I be morally sound if my own ideas so radically conflict with what seems to be a global truth?”

WHO CARES about the ideas of the rest of them!? Just because they say it doesn’t mean its true or more justified or anything. No… Only YOU can justify your own ideas and beliefs. The ultimate freedom of choice, ultimate individuality. Ofcourse you must consider the consequences of your actions always. Murder is NOT wrong in any absolute sense of the word. Think of it more like: “People may not be happy with me because of my actions and or beliefs, they may enact consequences upon me that I may not want.” Consider only that when you choose your actions, and when you judge yourself. There is no better reason.

This is ofcourse assuming you desire to live a peacefull, healthy life. There is no standard above desire, no way to judge which desires are better than others. Whatever you want goes. If you desire to murder for fun, and you are aware of the possible consequences, but desire it none-the-less, there is absolutely no reason not to go out and murder for fun. If YOU desire to lead men into combat and achieve a mission and recieve what I could only imagine is an extremely pleasurable feeling of acomplishment and an even more extremely pleasurable adrenaline rush, and you are aware of the consequences, but desire it none-the-less, than theres no reason you shouldn’t do it. You are lucky in that your desire is a taboo in almost all realms of society except war, and war is your buisness. Take advantage and live your life to the fullest. Fulfill your desires, whatever they may be. I only suggest that you always consider the consequences. Only maximising your awareness and consideration of the world around you allows you to be most rational, and more importantly, to achieve maximum pleasure.

Hi Rekughnize,

RussianTank covers most of what I wanted to say, but one more quick point:

*Perhaps you’re are caught between definitions:
Killing a human is generally accepted as wrong.
But in the above you don’t use the word human, you use enemy in the broad sense of ‘enemy’ designated by those who give you orders. Think of the word ‘enemy’ do you see a guy mowing his lawn, smiling at his wife and telling his kid to quit climbing that tree…? Or some snarling half-demon with a Kalashnikov leaping out to cut off your head…?

You/I have no qualms about killing a cockroach - why - it’s not human. You have no qualms (don’t damn yourself until you’ve actually killed someone btw. thought and action are not the same) about killing an ‘enemy’ because an enemy is that which has forsaken its humanity, at least in your eyes - you/we/mankind as a whole always dehumanize the enemy - to facillitate a guilt-free killing. Gooks, spooks, commies towelheads - all labels that swerve around the basic humanity of our targets. War is just a bunch of humans trying to kill eachother over an abstract concept arrived at by someone else.

Be careful though - too much philosophy may well damage you career prospects… And a hesitancy to pull the trigger may well get you killed.

you have stumbled, apparently by accident, on a very interesting piece of truth.

it is not morally wrong to kill other people.

it is however socially unacceptable in most circumstances

unfortunately, society doesn’t know its own ass.

thus, you are stuck in your little artificial dilemma. which is really just another way of formulating the age old “are you a pussy and gonna do what daddy says or are you ready to take his place and thus whoop the bastard”. you will have to solve your oedipian conflict on your own, little a board can do for you.

on the positive side, it seems to me lately military people are the only people left who do get the oedipian conflict anymore. cheer up, you might well be one of the few who even get the chance to mature.

If you don’t think that this can be connected to morality in general then please look away now, but if you do, what else you think I’m gona say except that “morality is herd instinct in the individual”…

You’re right, Zenofeller.

Want some irony? Want to confuse the Gods?

Precisely because it is right to kill people, I won’t do it.

I’m a rule breaker till the bitter end. :wink:

“morality is herd instinct in the individual”

I dont think its a biological instinct… I think its behavioral programing… But it does operate alot like instinct, and both were designed with survival in mind, if you could say evolution has survival in mind… But just like instincts are irational, so is morality. It may be instinct to duck when something is flying towards your face. But imagine that someone threw a soft, creamy pie at your face, but right in front and a little below your head is a giant spike. You see the pie coming, and automaticly, irationally react. You end up killing yourself because its an automatic process rather than a consideration of cause and effect, consequences. In the same way, one can find himself in a situation where his conditioning to be moral causes him to make the irational choice…