Equality or Superiority

[legendary_pervert]

i believe more in the idea of "survival of the fittest where only the strongest may survive"  

[Baulder]

Haha, dude, your username made me laugh so hard...  

[kakteed]

levasty

in advance i apologize to those who will get offended by this topic and if there is already a topic similar to this please direct me to it and don't post in here anymore

Equality or Superiority?
i for one believe in superiority equality does not and never did existed while superiority was always there and i think that everyone needs to be superior in orded to survive in this world
Eye for an Eye....an Equal trade? if that's the case that would only make the world go blind don't you think?

I'm of the mind that superiority is subjective. Take (yes, I'm about to chop things down to high schools; deal with it =P) cliques for example. Many times, a group of friends thinks they're better than the rest of the school and band together with that in mind, while another group is thinking the same thing. Which group is superior? That's up to you and them and the rest of the school. And then there's that group of friends that say that they're inferior to the rest of the school. They don't have to think it. It could be that they're superior to everyone in more ways than one but they don't think that.
And for the Equal Trade, I agree. Killing people because they killed doesn't seem to really put out a good example, don't you think? ;P  

[bluecherry]

"Don't force on other people especially what you aren't willing to have forced on you?" Sounds like it makes sense to me and it is the first violator's job to realize when they've gotten what they deserved and stop doing more stuff because at that point what they're doing doesn't count as "revenge" and certainly not "justice." The world need not go blind with an "eye for an eye" policy if people don't gouge eyes in the first place or at least the gouger realizes that every time they gouge they will be gouged and if they don't gouge, then not only will people not be allowed to gouge them, but most people would try to protect them from anybody who would try to start gouging them in the first place. I respect the rights of other people so long as they do not present a threat to anybody else's rights through force or fraud. The moment you seriously start presenting a threat to look like you're going to violate anybody else's rights through force or fraud, you forfeit all cause having your rights respected and as much as is necessary to in a timely fashion prevent, stop, or keep you from getting away with such things is justified. This means not intentionally doing more than you know is necessary for this isn't ok, however if it would take you longer to think of those things and/or do them than the amount of time you could reasonably believe you have, you're ok to do more than required, but still should not intentionally do much more than you know is needed (like shooting a kid to get them to stop looking at your journal for example, maybe they are violating your privacy, but generally that's going way too far. You could easily stop them quickly with much less force.)

 

[Evil Tuxedo]

I don't understand. We're all made of matter, so aren't we all equal?  

[Iudicious]

Evil Tuxedo

I don't understand. We're all made of matter, so aren't we all equal?

Is it our atoms that make us equal? Am I equal to a chair? Am I equal to a dandelion? Am I equal to a rabbit?
I think not.

Equality is a measurement. It measures something, and says that something is equal to something else. Let me ask you, am I equal to anyone else in this forum? Does anyone else here have the same nose, the same eyes, the same body as I? Moreover, has anyone else shared in the choices that I have made?
No.

Do not call me equal. Do not suggest that I am equal to another by any account, especially not in my morality, philosophy, choices, and capability. I know that I am greater than others, I know that I can do many things better than many people, and I know there are many things I cannot do better than others.

Equality is ONLY proper in relation to the law, and ONLY in respect to things that one cannot control (race, gender) or irrelevant (in relation to the case) choices (such as religion).

I'm not quite sure what we mean by "superiority" here. Are we asserting that a man has the right to enslave another or force another to do something because that man may be superior in some way? Or are we asserting a capitalistic approach, where man's success should not be restricted by the failure of others?

The former is wrong. In such a case, you are denying the rights of one human being - rights being a necessity of survival - and as such you forfeit your own rights.
The latter however is an absolute necessity if anyone intends to survive rationally and reasonably in the world.