CONNECT - DISCUSS - SURVIVE
Moral Compass
I think we can all agree on one thing; as it has been mentioned by everyone at least once in their Zombie scenario. The real monster aren't the mindless shufflers, they're driven by some base instinct and as such can't be considered evil (tho most will for sanity sake). No the true evil, the real monster will be the ones who lose themselves to the insanity of it all; the "human factor" as it has been called. So in my long winded way I ask this, where and when does your moral compass begin to start pointing the wrong way.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Andrew Morisson on -
My general feeling is that your moral compass is either pointing the wrong way from the beginning or not. Meaning: there are people who would rather starve than kill someone else for their food, no matter what. But, out of those who already have a "flexible" moral compass (and I think that would be the majority of people - myself included) the question becomes: when would individuals start acting on their immoral thoughts, rather than just thinking them.
Probably happen pretty fast. Several days or weeks after outbreak at the latest.
-
Permalink Reply by Ashley Paige on -
I think the instant somebody's loved on is in real danger they will do whatever it takes to help. All morals and conscience will be out the window from there on.
-
Permalink Reply by Killer13 on -
Our morality is something that is pretty engrained in most of us. I don't think its not going to change easily, even under the most severe circumstances. Look at the stories of hero soldiers who dive on grenades to save their comrades. Or the stories of the brave firemen who kept running back into the Twin Towers on 9/11 to try to save people.
-
Permalink Reply by Charlie Fedorov on -
Right. Soldiers and firefighters represent the best of our society. But what about the compulsive shoplifter, petty crook, or just lazy office worker who likes to cut corners? What about the average citizen who isn't a hero, but just a normal semi-selfish person? Some people would rise to the challenge and show great compassion for their fellow man, but I suspect most would be looking out for themselves, and if you have something they need - watch out.
Killer13 said:Our morality is something that is pretty engrained in most of us. I don't think its not going to change easily, even under the most severe circumstances. Look at the stories of hero soldiers who dive on grenades to save their comrades. Or the stories of the brave firemen who kept running back into the Twin Towers on 9/11 to try to save people.
-
Permalink Reply by Apocalypse Dan on -
That's an excellent observation. I mean, we wouldn't want a Stalinistic regime where "it would take a brave man -not- to be a hero". However unhinged an Apocalyptic scenario may be, it doesn't seem likely to completely alter the nature of the 'average' person.
-
Permalink Reply by Reid Pinkerton on -
well, as an analogy, i will bring up Lord of the Flies by William Golding.
within a few months of being on the island, Ralph and jack have a violent rivalry going on. so many deaths are caused by this. the evil in the children was brought on by insanity, depression, and desperateness.
i suppose in a zombie apocalyptic war zone, tensions will rise within weeks. whenever hunger comes on as a major factor. so the morality is going to be very low. in the movie "28 days later", the loyal soldiers morality was lost in less than a month and they all presumed to "sleep with, without consent" with one of the main characters. i suppose that we will not only be fighting zombies. we will be fighting each other.
morality is a difficult standard, but i suppose with a close knit group of buds brought closer by a zombie apocalypse, morality wont be a problem.
-
Permalink Reply by Alex Paradies on -
I wouldn't go around killing people right from the start. but I wouldn't have a problem putting a bullet in someone who was in my way. I don't care if they are raiders or just two idiots who are about to compromise my position, if it come down to me or them I know who I choose. The matter changes only when it involves my friends, family, and loved ones. I can shoot my dog and not care, but I couldn't kill my cousin with out a dam good reason (like getting bitten). I think the harder choice is when you have to kill people not cause they are trying to attack you but because they are stupid and will get you killed.
-
Permalink Reply by ZCORE Alabama leader Michael .U on -
i will do whatever it takes to get my team to saftey, i probably fit into the "flexible" moral compass bracket. in a situation that would call for such a drastic moral decision you should not think about the moral aspect, you have to see your goal and reach it no matter what. so if anyones moral compass "switches" directions, it may seem harsh but there is a good chance that they have a good reason for doing it.
-
Permalink Reply by Natalie Rose Fisher on -
It would depend entirely on who I was interacting with, I think.
For starters, I don't even know that I have a moral compass.
While I'd like to keep my family safe, I wouldn't even want to be taking care of them if it came to that: they wouldn't listen to me.
I got a quick snippet of how they'd act in a traumatic situation.
I was the only one not yelling when the back of the house set on fire due to a faulty propane tank: I got the kids out of the house while they were sobbing, my stepmother was shrieking, and my dad was questioning what was actually happening.
I wouldn't deal with that. I'd likely take the 9 year old and go. (she's the only helpful one) She'd listen to me, and she's the one I'd be able to keep safe.
There are two specific friends I would want to try to get to: who I know would never let me down in a situation like this.
Regarding other folks, The more people around, the more likely we are to become "infected" so I really don't know what I'd do. If they put my sister in danger, I'd get pissed, if they touched our foodstuffs, I would also be pissed. To the point of killing, I dunno. If it came down to it, I guess I would. I would really have to be immersed in the situation to know exactly how I would react though.
-
Permalink Reply by Conal on
-
it sounds selfish but when a class 3 outbreak outbreaks i'm leaving everyone i know and sticking it on my own. this is because one person is easier to defend if he/ she knows what he/she is doing (which i do) and the food will last longer which means there are less times that you have to venture into towns for supplies which prolongs the time you survive. another reason is that humans generally feel the need to communicate when together which could give away your position. if your alone the ammo would last longer, there are no emotional attatchments to anything so you wont be destracted and finally there is no risk of having to kill your friend if he/she becomes infected. on the other hand a companion is useful to watch your 6 and to co-ordinate on supplies runs. a companion could also help keep watch and different skills are useful aswell. you guys do what you want but i'm on my own when world war Z comes. try and survive :)
-
Permalink Reply by Lucas Garecht on -
a class 3 outbreak? no such thing.... and dont you dare say you heard it in a movie, thats the most stupid thing anyone could ever do, is base what they think they know about zombies from what they've seen in movies and read in books....its FAKE! movies are scripted!!
idiots....
Conal said:it sounds selfish but when a class 3 outbreak outbreaks i'm leaving everyone i know and sticking it on my own. this is because one person is easier to defend if he/ she knows what he/she is doing (which i do) and the food will last longer which means there are less times that you have to venture into towns for supplies which prolongs the time you survive. another reason is that humans generally feel the need to communicate when together which could give away your position. if your alone the ammo would last longer, there are no emotional attatchments to anything so you wont be destracted and finally there is no risk of having to kill your friend if he/she becomes infected. on the other hand a companion is useful to watch your 6 and to co-ordinate on supplies runs. a companion could also help keep watch and different skills are useful aswell. you guys do what you want but i'm on my own when world war Z comes. try and survive :)
-
Permalink Reply by the jack o' lantern on -
some morals are important to keep mindless killing of other survivors for no motive is wrong but killing a fellow survivor who is infected or endangered everyone else more than once as far as im concerned bye bye moron
About
© 2010 Created by Andrew Morisson on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
