My first class this morning was SO (Social/society orientation). We've been going through the social and moral dilemmas the people living in the 1910's - 1940's Germany would face in there lives. So, this morning we we're reading out of some book, more specifically a story about an SS soldier who did some nasty shit.

Then it happened. Our teacher (a stand in) wrote the word "RATIONALISM" in big capital letters on the whiteboard, underlined it and said "Rationalism, is when a person or a group of people commit an evil deed, and justify it by saying it is the good thing to do."

Now I usually don't react while in school, nor do i get into discussions among other people then my friends IRL. I do that here on AF where you can find people who are actually well educated, reasonable and intelligent enough (hint*Muscletang and fredjacksonsan*hint) to maintain a discussion without name calling, fists and overall immature outcomes. Though when it comes to this.. I've titled myself a Rationalistic Individualist recently, so this was like calling a any of you evil without know what the hell it means.

So. Most of you probably have read the thread here on "Good and Evil", and maybe know my view on it. However, the only things of my beliefs on good and evil today that matter is that I believe that if you define evil you start hating, and if you hate there will be an opposite side. Now the books we're getting are really partial. I strongly reject partial education in every form (note that I dont hate it), because it always creates tension and hate itself. If a person is rasied to believe that Nazis are evil and that he should hate them, he will hate them. If a person is raised to believe that Nazis did everything wrong and we're evil but not to be hated, they will hate them.

The hate towards the Nazis is taking form in "Anti" Fascist movements, like the AFA and Antifa here (AFA = Anti Fascist Action). These are probably the most Fascist movements in modern time. Everything that looks nazi or right wing is evil and being beat the shit out of. In the meantime, the other side (Nazis) developes even stronger hate for them + everyone who tend to think just alittle like them. Hate, hate, hate and more hate, I can't stand it.

Anways, So at this point I rasied my hand and said "The book is wrong, and so are you." Mumbleing starts as every pair of eyes is towards me. "The book is partial. Rationalism is NOT justifying an evil deed. Evil itself cannot be by any means be defined and therefore should absolutely not be in any of the books here in this school. Rationalism is doing something for a purpose, and that purpose is always for you own winning, including actions taken to improve the situation of somebody else because you want to see them in a better situation. Although that is a whole other discussion, the definition of rationalism stays the same. It's doing something out of a purpose and looking beyond the shallow morals of today, not excluding making the situation for those who live by those morals better. Bottom line's that no partial education should be in this classroom. Tha Nazis weren't evil, they we're simply not acting with the means of democracy, "humanity" and everybody elses beliefs. Im sure that everybody here can decide for themselfs what side's the best to follow."

The outcome is this: The teacher basically changes her mind and almost apoligizes.

The left side of the room, where the mindless blondes sit, started shouting out things like "oh give me a fucking break" "oh you think youre so smart huh" and "just shut up already you dork". Although I know they didn't know what the hell I was saying at all and barely knew what we were discussing before I started speaking either, and the reason they got bitchy was because 1. they dont like me, 2. I used really hard words like "purpose" and "discussion".

Everyone else agreed. And here's the cool part; In this class we have one black muslim, one skinhead nazi and one Jehovas whitness. The three complete counterparts here. They all agreed with me. How could they? Because I wasn't being -partial-.

Anyway, feel free to throw rocks and critizise, i dont regret one word.

I agree, I think...
The concept of 'evil' is a relative term for a point-of-view. Not everyone on the face of the planet will condemn an action as 'evil' because its a matter of opinion. Like all opinions, 'evil' is subjective to each individual and cannot be openly defined for all applications.

Relative terms can, however, be defined for the grounds of debating as to narrowing down a definition of a term for overall clarity and understanding.

You're right man, thats why people actually become Nazi's, its what THEY think is right. Thats why in and Good vs. Evil story, there are actually people on the 'evil' side. If everyone had the same interpretation of good and evil, there would be no wars, no fights, no confrontation. Thats why I'm not a religious person, but thats a whole 'nother story.

As for the blondes, you shoulda mowed them fuckers down for extra browny points.

I think you were right in what you said. The Nazis and fascists did what they believed to be "right" in their given situation. They listened to the rhetoric of their leader and believed he was guiding their nation to become stronger, not necessarily "evil." You can easily see this with the way the US acted toward USSR all during the post war era, especially in the 80s when nuclear arms were paramount in foreign dealings. Every Reagan abiding citizen of the US believed the USSR were evil communists bent on world domination. I'm sure their leaders instilled the same ideals in their citizens as well. But I don't have to tell you this because it seems like you totally understand. Rationalism is the justifying of a means to an end no matter what that means is or what it pertains to (good or evil). I think it's awesome that the teacher retracted the definition given and apologized.

you've got to be careful that you don't end up arguing over the exact meaning of the term instead of the intention of the term.


how about we take your nazi example and let me ask you the simple question:
do you think that what they did was good?

do you think that what they did was good?


I'm sure everyone that isn't a Nazi will say hell no, but the argument is that its what THEY thought was good.

It's the same reason terrorists in the middle-east hate us, we are doing what we think is right(women's rights, etc.) even though they think its wrong. In turn, they decide that it is worth giving up their life to kill these "evil-doing" americans even though we think it is wrong. Everyone that isn't a nazi thinks that the nazis killing millions of jews is wrong, even though the nazis thought that they were eliminating the root of all problems in Germany.

I'm sure everyone that isn't a Nazi will say hell no, but the argument is that its what THEY thought was good.

that's not strictly true either.
much of it was down to apathy and simple obeying of an authoritative figure as per the Milgram experiments.

that's not strictly true either.
much of it was down to apathy and simple obeying of an authoritative figure as per the Milgram experiments.


Thats an interesting point, I just looked up the Milgram experiments on wikipedia.

So in a way, the Nazi's obeying Hitler is in many ways similar to a child obeying its parents. One of the wikipedia quotes:

"...the essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view himself as the instrument for carrying out another person's wishes, and he therefore no longer sees himself as responsible for his actions. Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow. This is basically the foundation of military respect for authority..."

I would imagine peer pressure would've forced alot of people into forming themselves into a Nazi, along with the fear of what would happen if they didn't join up. Sort of like how a parent would put the fear into a child to keep him/her in an obedient order.

Interesting stuff considering I'm about a month away from going into the military.

The things the Nazis did was good for what they believed. Every Nazi were happy when the Jews were killed off. To everyone else, it wasn't.

I don't use the word godo and bad nomore.

Though the discussion was not about the nazis, more of the word Rationalism.

The things the Nazis did was good for what they believed. Every Nazi were happy when the Jews were killed off. To everyone else, it wasn't.

I don't use the word godo and bad nomore.

Though the discussion was not about the nazis, more of the word Rationalism.

and that is exactly my point.
there is a difference in believing what you are doing is good (or right) and whether the action actually is good.
believing in something doesn't make it right or even true in the case of the propaganda that was the root of the Nazi's persecution of the Jews.

and again, I doubt that there was anything more to the Nazi's being "happy" about Jews being killed than mob mentality, Milgram type reactions and (mass hysteria" type reactions as per faith healing seminars.
Don't forget that Jews being killed lead directly to high level Nazi party members getting very rich and very powerful. Happy about getting money and power doesn't directly mean that they are happy about Jews being killed; that's just apathy again, suffering of others that they can't experience compared to personal gains that they can.

you can say that looking to benefit one's self is in a way a "good" thing but again, benefitting one's self doesn't have to equate to doing harm to others.

you seem to be focussing too much on the meaning of the term rationalism instead of the intent as I said before.
let me explain it a little bit more as how I see it by way of an example.

I firmly believe that on a fundemental level, you should do whatever you want.
If you want to eat a nice, fat, greasy, double cheeseburger from the deli burgerbar, then you should just go ahead and eat it. You shouldn't let outside influence (by which I mean that skinny, pom pom, shaking stereotype next door) tell you otherwise.
If you want to buy someone a present for no reason, go ahead.
If you want to take two weeks off and go incommunicado, do it.
But that doesn't justify doing what is harmful to others in order to fulfil the first belief.
I would like to have £1,000,000 in my bank account but that doesn't justify my robbing people.
I would like to get that job at that office but that doesn't mean I should go and kill every other applicant.

I think MonsterBengt's point is that you could rationalize all of those things.

Perhaps "good" and "evil" cannot be defined for all at once(and I begin to be swayed in that direction); however you can see that an act is harmful to someone else, as drunken monkey said.

Right and wrong seem to be linked strongly to the viewpoint of the observer. If involved in some extreme faction such as the Nazis, they may find that exterminating certain peoples (Poles, Russians, scientists, and many other groups were systematically killed, not just Jews) is ok from their point of view and for certain reasons, thereby rationalizing their actions. BUT the consensus outside of the Nazi regime was that their actions were horrible.

But in rationalizing, they are not taking into account the harm that is done to the other people, only justifying their own actions.

In rationalization, it seems to me that you could argue that by needing to rationalize what you have done, you are trying to convince yourself or others that it was ok to do the thing(s) you have done. If it was not a problem to do something, why would you have to rationalize


Rationalization....
to bring into accord with reason or cause something to seem reasonable: as a: to substitute a natural for a supernatural explanation of <rationalize a myth> b: to attribute (one's actions) to rational (http://209.161.33.50/dictionary/rational) and creditable motives without analysis of true and especially unconscious motives <rationalized his dislike of his brother>; broadly : to create an excuse or more attractive explanation for <rationalize the problem> (other definitions were for mathematical applications)

What I'm saying here goes along with the definition; that outwardly you are justifying what was done, making it seem credible, or ok. But look at definition b: ...without analysis of true and especially unconscious motives, or even to create an excuse.

So IMO rationalization is a kind of cover up for something you know to have been the wrong thing to do.

Kudos man. That was a great point.

I believe the teacher was "rational" enough to realize she made a mistake.:lol:

Kudos man. That was a great point.

I believe the teacher was "rational" enough to realize she made a mistake.:lol:

She was. And she was rational enough to not yell it out in the open, but rather say it discretely to me and my friends at our table to prevent a greater loss of respect from the rest of the class.

being rational isn't exactly the same as what is meant by rationalising/rationalism.

being rational isn't exactly the same as what is meant by rationalising/rationalism.

I know, i just thought rationalistic sounded wierd after using the word rational. Is rationalistic the correct term for the actions of a person following rationalism?

being rational isn't exactly the same as what is meant by rationalising/rationalism.
True, but it's still funny.