Should a society be judged on how it treats its weak?
What are the benefits of discarding the weak?
What are the disadvantages?
To what extent could the weak be useful in a successful society?
>pic unrelated
>>72296368
I hate when I lose my squeaky toy too.
>>72296368
>treats its weak
The fact that you see them as weak, shows that you were raised in a shit society.
If we get rid of all the weaks we will find others to be considered weak.
In the end it will be just one dude, alone. The strongest person of the world.
>>72296808
Simultaneously the strongest and weakest person in the world, you mean.
He'll have to get gassed, too.
>>72296368
>Should a society be judged on how it treats its weak?
Somewhat
>What are the benefits of discarding the weak?
More money for the strong.
>What are the disadvantages?
Cold, cruel, and miserable society.
>To what extent could the weak be useful in a successful society?
Menial jobs.
>>72296808
When people talks about the "weak" sociologically they're usually talking about people with mental or physical disabilities where they can't cope in society.
>>72296974
>>To what extent could the weak be useful in a successful society?
>Menial jobs.
Isn't that the basis of the working class?
>>72296748
weak person detected
>>72296368
Yes, it should be judged by how it treats its weak.
A society that squanders resources on useless people instead of investing in those who have potential is weak and inefficient.
>>72296974
I think "poor" would qualify as 'weak'
>>72297272
You say sumthin' white boi?
>>72296368
>Should a society be judged on how it treats its weak?
It can be, but what it is judged as will change depending on who's asked.
>What are the benefits of discarding the weak?
The strong survive. In some cases the weak are protected because they provide a useful service. This is roughly how society has run since forever.
>To what extent could the weak be useful in a successful society?
They make babies, or work on solving some mystery of the universe, or is a source of useful wisdom.
>>72296368
Why care for a society if it does not care for people?
A good society looks after the weak. Even wild dogs have it figured out.
>>72296368
The way a society treats it's most vulnerable individuals is a direct reflection on how empathetic that society is, and says a great deal about social cohesion.
Consider the following. In wolf packs, fallen injured members are cared for and looked after even if they cannot contribute to hunting. Meanwhile, wolves who engage in antisocial behavior or unsuccessfully try to usurp authority are driven out, regardless of how tough they are.
As a social species, human beings are completely dependent upon each other for survival. Individuals who care for others, even when their is no directly self-interested reason to do so, are generally more well adjusted to surviving in civil society. This is visible to others who, thanks to our instincts and social programming, see them as empathetic and thus trustworthy.
As another form of proof, and a final note, consider this also:
There has never been a successful society populated primarily by psychopaths.
NO
>>72300698
but Ryan senpai, your society was a failure
And some parts of your city were named after Ayn Rand, which is just plain disgusting
>>72301019
Sleep tight, pupper.
>>72300050
The Mongols and the Vikings seem pretty fucking devoid of empathy. Vikings used to throw babies in the air and catch them on their blade points.
Refusing to do so would earn you the "baby lover" title which is pretty much the same thing as "cuck" or "pussy".
>>72301019
Owner is an idiot. He just made the boa kick its instincts, you only serve rats or meat. It will be fun to watch him play with his pet around his neck now, that can easily kill a adult human.
>>72301220
In-group vs out-group is different. One of the biggest problems with multiculturalism and diversity is these categories break down or are blurred. In-group dynamics favor empathy.
>>72301019
Chinese boa?
>>72301220
The difference is that the Norse knew what to do with their psychopaths. Make them into Vikings.
Not all Norse people were Vikings, because you can't have a raid based society, that would be dumb. Even of the Vikings that existed very few would actually raid, most just traded.
t. former Vikingboo disapointed by actual history
>>72301019
Ahhh, The Vietnamese Python
No society can function without cannon fodder/proletariat etc
Society should be judged on how it treats its members - all of its members. Yoking the strong to the weak is not fair to the strong. Discarding the weak is not fair to the weak. We must be fair to all. How much we take from the strong should not depend on how much the weak need.
>>72304869
>How much we take from the strong should not depend on how much the weak need.
So what *should* it depend on?
>>72306166
It should depend on what it is fair to take from them. If we decide that 10% is fair today then 10% ought to be what is taken tomorrow, even if overnight another 10,000 people begin to starve.
The weak should not be discarded, but the burden of the weak cannot be indefinitely heaped on the shoulders of the strong. It's not fair to them.
Basically I'm in favour of a fixed welfare budget. X amount of revenue ought to be set aside for welfare, and if that's not enough then programs get cut instead of more taxes being levied. The only time it's acceptable to increase revenue to pay for welfare is to meet immediate human needs like food, water, and shelter. Increasing the tax burden to pay for extended maternity leave is not fair to the strong. Welfare should never pay for luxuries, because why do the weak deserve luxuries more than the strong? The weak are entitled to life, not comfort.
