Mercy it origin..

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Mercy it origin..

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

xris
 
Reply Mon 20 Apr, 2009 06:23 am
Sorry but as a untrained observer of philosophy i was trying to find when the act of mercy on a stranger became a recognisable event.Justice is mentioned and mercy within the family can be seen but it is not mentioned very often in ancient writings.It appears to become more recognisable in the christian tradition more so than in its teachings.Even when it has become recognised, its practice takes us beyond the middle ages and even in Tudor times it has romantic overtones.
It appears an abstract notion am i right?
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Mon 20 Apr, 2009 10:16 am
@xris,
When has mercy not been recognized?

Certainly, there are slightly different conceptions of mercy, or at least the practice thereof, but acting kindly toward others is something that has always been understood by humans, at least since we began to write and presumably prior to that time.

The most ancient of Hindu texts mention something of mercy, we find it in Homeric writings... I'd have to give it another read, but my gut tells me that some evidence of mercy can be found in Gilgamesh.
 
xris
 
Reply Mon 20 Apr, 2009 12:35 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
When has mercy not been recognized?

Certainly, there are slightly different conceptions of mercy, or at least the practice thereof, but acting kindly toward others is something that has always been understood by humans, at least since we began to write and presumably prior to that time.

The most ancient of Hindu texts mention something of mercy, we find it in Homeric writings... I'd have to give it another read, but my gut tells me that some evidence of mercy can be found in Gilgamesh.
I have given it a certain interest but cant find it as acceptable in the sense as we understand mercy.I would say in certain societies it is almost incomprehensible. The Romans could keep a prisoner as a family pet for twenty years then kill them without a moments thought.They would then philosophies on a narrow band of thought that excluded non Romans or slaves as not worthy of consideration, almost blind to their existance.We had the same attitude towards black slaves.A trader would act reasonably to a free white man but think of black slaves as non human, so his philosophy of life would exclude them.
I may be wrong but i have tried to see this concept of mercy as not being confined to narrow philosophical ideas and it is hard to find.
 
Fido
 
Reply Mon 20 Apr, 2009 07:51 pm
@xris,
xris wrote:
Sorry but as a untrained observer of philosophy i was trying to find when the act of mercy on a stranger became a recognisable event.Justice is mentioned and mercy within the family can be seen but it is not mentioned very often in ancient writings.It appears to become more recognisable in the christian tradition more so than in its teachings.Even when it has become recognised, its practice takes us beyond the middle ages and even in Tudor times it has romantic overtones.
It appears an abstract notion am i right?

I would say, not...It is a recognition of fate, and that is why primitives who universally accept fate are universally merciful... For this reason the Jews were not merciful, thinking a man earned all he recieved, but the Muslims are, well aware of the part fate plays in every existence... So, they find it more easy to forgive even the worst of crimes, and try always to spare a life, saying that if you save a life it is as if you saved all of humanity.. And we say forgive us our tresspasses as we forgive those...That means we are all in trouble...
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 03:34 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
I would say, not...It is a recognition of fate, and that is why primitives who universally accept fate are universally merciful... For this reason the Jews were not merciful, thinking a man earned all he recieved, but the Muslims are, well aware of the part fate plays in every existence... So, they find it more easy to forgive even the worst of crimes, and try always to spare a life, saying that if you save a life it is as if you saved all of humanity.. And we say forgive us our tresspasses as we forgive those...That means we are all in trouble...
Muslims held slaves, raped their enemies wives,castrated their slaves.They killed 80 million Hindu pagans in the name of god.Their scriptures don't encourage mercy so how do you come by this assumption.
Can you give an example of primitive tribes showing mercy to their sworn enemies?
The concept of mercy can be confused with justice or love when reading historical accounts.I could well be totally wrong but it requires investigation.
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 05:47 am
@xris,
xris wrote:
Muslims held slaves, raped their enemies wives,castrated their slaves.They killed 80 million Hindu pagans in the name of god.Their scriptures don't encourage mercy so how do you come by this assumption.
Can you give an example of primitive tribes showing mercy to their sworn enemies?
The concept of mercy can be confused with justice or love when reading historical accounts.I could well be totally wrong but it requires investigation.

I don't know where you come by your misinformation; but Muslims were much more inclined to buy a slave castrated if they wanted one castrated, because it is a dangerous operation if not done, as the Christians did it, to babies, as the Bible says, crushing the testicles between two stones. Consider, that when things were bad in China, people lined up for imperial service, and for the hope of food and shelter let themselves be cut up with a 50% likely hood of dieing of a subsequent infection...
The Muslims did not rape, but they would marry the daughters or wives of their enemies...
And in regard to pagans, there was no call for mercy.. The mercy consisted of this: They had to warn any person three times to convert to Islam, and after that, they could be killed at will...Among their own, and other people of the book, they are merciful... Like American Indians or the German tribes; if a murderer were not caught when the blood was hot, there was a chance the murderer could escape with a payment of blood money, which usually involved two family groups getting together and settling on a price... Everyone wanted to avoid feud, and everyone looked for an excuse to make peace...In very recent times, a murderer condemed to death, In Iran, I believe, was freed from that penalty by the father of the slain...Since the condemned was European, there was a lot of press there for the event, and the father announced this to them with tears streaming down his face, saying this is who we are and what we do...As they conceive of the God as merciful, they can hardly avoid mercy, believing they will be judged upon their actions...

Among the American Indians, any man who had not killed one of their people, when captured was likely to be adopted to replace some person lost to the enemy...It was never any sort of dogma, but compared to what whites have often said of their enemies, British to Irish for example, or Americans to natives; that nits make lice -to excuse killing babies, children and mothers, the Natives were very merciful... They might take a baby and raise it as their own, but no honor would come to a man killing a child or a women, and they lived in honor societies...
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 05:56 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
I don't know where you come by your misinformation; but Muslims were much more inclined to buy a slave castrated if they wanted one castrated, because it is a dangerous operation if not done, as the Christians did it, to babies, as the Bible says, crushing the testicles between two stones. Consider, that when things were bad in China, people lined up for imperial service, and for the hope of food and shelter let themselves be cut up with a 50% likely hood of dieing of a subsequent infection...
The Muslims did not rape, but they would marry the daughters or wives of their enemies...
And in regard to pagans, there was no call for mercy.. The mercy consisted of this: They had to warn any person three times to convert to Islam, and after that, they could be killed at will...Among their own, and other people of the book, they are merciful... Like American Indians or the German tribes; if a murderer were not caught when the blood was hot, there was a chance the murderer could escape with a payment of blood money, which usually involved two family groups getting together and settling on a price... Everyone wanted to avoid feud, and everyone looked for an excuse to make peace...In very recent times, a murderer condemed to death, In Iran, I believe, was freed from that penalty by the father of the slain...Since the condemned was European, there was a lot of press there for the event, and the father announced this to them with tears streaming down his face, saying this is who we are and what we do...As they conceive of the God as merciful, they can hardly avoid mercy, believing they will be judged upon their actions...

Among the American Indians, any man who had not killed one of their people, when captured was likely to be adopted to replace some person lost to the enemy...It was never any sort of dogma, but compared to what whites have often said of their enemies, British to Irish for example, or Americans to natives; that nits make lice -to excuse killing babies, children and mothers, the Natives were very merciful... They might take a baby and raise it as their own, but no honor would come to a man killing a child or a women, and they lived in honor societies...
Sorry to disillusion you but barbary pirates, Muslims by the will of Allah took slaves, rapped their conquests and castrated their slaves.Millions of African slaves became eunuchs for the Arab world but their genes do not survive because of castration.I'm sorry again but you have not given me any examples of mercy as we now perceive the notion.I'm beginning to think should we discuss what mercy is..
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 06:13 am
@xris,
xris wrote:
Sorry to disillusion you but barbary pirates, Muslims by the will of Allah took slaves, rapped their conquests and castrated their slaves.Millions of African slaves became eunuchs for the Arab world but their genes do not survive because of castration.I'm sorry again but you have not given me any examples of mercy as we now perceive the notion.I'm beginning to think should we discuss what mercy is..

I think you ought to read a book; and perhaps the Book...As Lawrence of Arabia pointed out in the Seven Pillars of Wisdom, There are many black and blackish people among the Arabs just because the Book counts the freeing of a slave as a mercy...It was not as the Romans did it, to throw their aged slaves on the corn dole...
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 06:35 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
I think you ought to read a book; and perhaps the Book...As Lawrence of Arabia pointed out in the Seven Pillars of Wisdom, There are many black and blackish people among the Arabs just because the Book counts the freeing of a slave as a mercy...It was not as the Romans did it, to throw their aged slaves on the corn dole...
.It is written they can take the women of enemies as slaves and have sex with them ,with or without their consent. They can also split husband and wife slaves and sell them to different buyers.
Giving the option to revert before they killed them is not mercy in any stretch of the imagination.Slaves where automatically castrated when serving in harems, another allowance for Muslims.It is well documented the suffering European slaves endured when captured by Muslim pirates.
I'm asking for examples of mercy that we consider mercy, do you consider these acts merciful?
 
VideCorSpoon
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 10:40 am
@xris,
Mercy is linked with human compassion. I'm not trying to sound corny or anything like that, but mercy is probably one of those human responses that is as innate as the propensity to survive and what not. It is as Didymos says in that mercy "has always been understood by humans." As such, I don't know if there was any official introduction to mercy the way metaphysics or something like that was. But historically, you could find a ton
 
Fido
 
Reply Tue 21 Apr, 2009 04:40 pm
@xris,
xris wrote:
.It is written they can take the women of enemies as slaves and have sex with them ,with or without their consent. They can also split husband and wife slaves and sell them to different buyers.
Giving the option to revert before they killed them is not mercy in any stretch of the imagination.Slaves where automatically castrated when serving in harems, another allowance for Muslims.It is well documented the suffering European slaves endured when captured by Muslim pirates.
I'm asking for examples of mercy that we consider mercy, do you consider these acts merciful?

Judging them from our perspective in time is not mercy... I don't think we are merciful...We have five percent of the world's population, and of the world's population behind bars we have twenty-five percent...

You only have to look at how the Muslims were before to find them merciful...Is there something wrong with your eyes??? Seriously, what percent of slaves do you expect served as bed guards??? I mean, there is a perfectly good man, who could be productive turned into an it, and eating as much as any other and supported by all others in society...Considering the low level of technology, and how labor intensive all of life was; do you think such people were all that common except for the most wealthy... The fact is, that it was the slavers themselves who took the risk, because it was risky to castrate, but once that occured, and the man survived, then he would bring more money... Again, they must not all have been castrated, since there are many dark skinned people among the Arabs...

Compare them to the Spanish when they had driven the Muslims out...Compare them to the Greek/Romans of Constantinople...They defeated one army from the Balkans, and out of every one hundred left one man, with one eye to lead the other ninety-nine back home blind... Were the Greek or the Roman's merciful...One time, the Gauls tried to revolt, and Caesar cut the hands off every man he could find, and called it Mercy...

You say Mercy; and I say: Mercy compared to what??? The Muslims are incredibly pacific... They are not suffering from too much blood shed, but too much birth... They are breeding themselves into poverty and war with others, but among themselves know general peace, and part of that peace is due to the fact that in warfare, mercy is very little found... Yet, even between the Turks who were notoriously cruel, and the Arabs, during the revolt, it was only when the Ottoman empire was crumbling and the retreating Turks were slaughtering the native non combatants, was the order given to take no prisoners...
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 03:18 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
Judging them from our perspective in time is not mercy... I don't think we are merciful...We have five percent of the world's population, and of the world's population behind bars we have twenty-five percent...

You only have to look at how the Muslims were before to find them merciful...Is there something wrong with your eyes??? Seriously, what percent of slaves do you expect served as bed guards??? I mean, there is a perfectly good man, who could be productive turned into an it, and eating as much as any other and supported by all others in society...Considering the low level of technology, and how labor intensive all of life was; do you think such people were all that common except for the most wealthy... The fact is, that it was the slavers themselves who took the risk, because it was risky to castrate, but once that occured, and the man survived, then he would bring more money... Again, they must not all have been castrated, since there are many dark skinned people among the Arabs...

Compare them to the Spanish when they had driven the Muslims out...Compare them to the Greek/Romans of Constantinople...They defeated one army from the Balkans, and out of every one hundred left one man, with one eye to lead the other ninety-nine back home blind... Were the Greek or the Roman's merciful...One time, the Gauls tried to revolt, and Caesar cut the hands off every man he could find, and called it Mercy...

You say Mercy; and I say: Mercy compared to what??? The Muslims are incredibly pacific... They are not suffering from too much blood shed, but too much birth... They are breeding themselves into poverty and war with others, but among themselves know general peace, and part of that peace is due to the fact that in warfare, mercy is very little found... Yet, even between the Turks who were notoriously cruel, and the Arabs, during the revolt, it was only when the Ottoman empire was crumbling and the retreating Turks were slaughtering the native non combatants, was the order given to take no prisoners...
Im not comparing them to anyone else.You placed them on the pedestal and that is wrong.They invaded every neighbouring country and in three centuries killed 80 million Hindus..80 million...Afghanistan was a Buddhist country before the muslims invaded and slew every Buddhist.Read your history of slavery and the Muslim involvement and then tell me they did not take countless millions from Africa and then castrate the vast majority.Tell me than did not take thousands of slaves from europe.My nearest large city Plymouth lost two thousand in one year.We are not debating Islamic horrors or wonderful enlightened slaughter of those who refused to revert, we are debating the modern view of mercy.We are not debating crime and punishment but mercy on a personal level.
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 05:50 am
@xris,
I am not going to argue with your figures...In fact, I will assume they are true, and ask where is your proof that those people killed would have been worse off, which is to say, not killed any way??? The history of mankind has been one of constant struggle...People often blew through Afghanistan for example...Is it possible anyone not Islamic could hold Afghanistan today???Unity is the best defense, and the fact is that India never did present the problem for colonial rule that Pakistan, or Afghanistan did...And, considering Bhuddists; there are still many Chinese Bhuddists, but their cruelty is notable in many places owned by Bhddists who are not Chinese...And the Russians who conquered much of central Asia with great cruelty are still supporting the claims of imported European Russians against natives...The Turks were notably cruel; even to other Muslims...

What then can anyone compare mercy with except the situation, and what came before...When Jack London wrote about the hairpin turn on the way to the Klondike Gold field, and the animals trapped and alive and trampled under the hoves of other horses soon to be trapped, and trampled, it points out that where animals are abused, used up and destroyed, people can expect little better from life... We can look at some hard geography, or climates, and all but guarantee that people living there will be cruel...It is easy to judge people based upon our easy chair existence... The fact is that we often do very little to ease the lives of people in cruel places, but make them worse, more painful, short, and futile... Should we judge them unmerciful when we, knowing better, do not give better???

Who exports more war material than the United States??? Who has more thermonuclear weapons??? Who will not sign the chemical Weapons ban, or the land mine treaty???As a people we are no better than any other, and have improved but little from the middle ages when Richard the Lion Hearted killed so many Muslim prisoners at Acre...
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 06:09 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
I am not going to argue with your figures...In fact, I will assume they are true, and ask where is your proof that those people killed would have been worse off, which is to say, not killed any way??? The history of mankind has been one of constant struggle...People often blew through Afghanistan for example...Is it possible anyone not Islamic could hold Afghanistan today???Unity is the best defense, and the fact is that India never did present the problem for colonial rule that Pakistan, or Afghanistan did...And, considering Bhuddists; there are still many Chinese Bhuddists, but their cruelty is notable in many places owned by Bhddists who are not Chinese...And the Russians who conquered much of central Asia with great cruelty are still supporting the claims of imported European Russians against natives...The Turks were notably cruel; even to other Muslims...

What then can anyone compare mercy with except the situation, and what came before...When Jack London wrote about the hairpin turn on the way to the Klondike Gold field, and the animals trapped and alive and trampled under the hoves of other horses soon to be trapped, and trampled, it points out that where animals are abused, used up and destroyed, people can expect little better from life... We can look at some hard geography, or climates, and all but guarantee that people living there will be cruel...It is easy to judge people based upon our easy chair existence... The fact is that we often do very little to ease the lives of people in cruel places, but make them worse, more painful, short, and futile... Should we judge them unmerciful when we, knowing better, do not give better???

Who exports more war material than the United States??? Who has more thermonuclear weapons??? Who will not sign the chemical Weapons ban, or the land mine treaty???As a people we are no better than any other, and have improved but little from the middle ages when Richard the Lion Hearted killed so many Muslim prisoners at Acre...
Why o why are you so defensive of muslim atrocities and condemn all other acts of barbarism?i know others have acted most terribly, i wont dispute that but muslims have had more than their share of innocent blood on their hands.Why are you trying to defend them against their slaughter of 80 million pagans? have you an agenda?Why don't you accept the history of Islam is filled with slavery and slaughter?The crusaders where trying to get back their most treasured city, the birth place of their saviour, don't you think the muslims would do the same.An infidel cant even visit mecca let alone claim it as his.
This digresses..if you want to discuss muslim history make another thread.
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 06:13 am
@xris,
The Arabs never moved much beyond Araby.... And this is true of most Muslims.. They passed the religion, and it was the converts that pushed the religion forward, and also they who were the most cruel, often to traditional enemies... The Muslims of Pakistan are little different from the Hindus of India....You can blame Islam, but the wickedness of men is still their wickedness..
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 06:14 am
@Fido,
The Village: 21st Century Slavery in Africa. this Islam today not yesterday today..

---------
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 08:47 am
@xris,
Spare me... Where were they a hundred years ago, or fifty??? We have woke up that hornets nest by supporting Israel and every other sort of injustice against them... Now that we find we are stretched to the limit, they find our weak spot, which is not our weak spot, but all Christians who are unable to defend themselves... Having peace with those people was easy... We had it for hundreds of years... All we had to do was give them their space... Too much to ask???
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 09:11 am
@Fido,
From now on friend i am only going to answer direct questions about mercy...I will say don't assume i support Israel by my comments.
Mercy is a concept arrived at by thousands of years of human evolution.It is compassion for the enemy who has harmed you but lies helpless at your feet.A judge can show leniency on a criminal for certain reasons but he can not be allowed to show mercy.It is not arbitrary.He should judge by the law.
The more powerful, the more mercy they can show.Compassion does not require an action mercy does.It is not confined by social attachments or by family.
Soldiers in battle have understandable conflicts of human feelings, he is the one that has to decide on his personal feelings of mercy.No one can dictate his actions they are beyond his commanders orders.
The history of mercy is confusing because many times leniency is shown when circumstances require this action but when for example a terrible enemy who has just attacked your village is cornered, it always ends in his death.
 
Fido
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 10:21 am
@xris,
If one shows what we thiink of as mercy to ones kin; it is not mercy, but an obligation...To be mercy, it must not be required, but above and beyond what is required, and come from a largess, and a generosity of the spirit...What the past shows, is that people were incapable of such feelings, but were hospitable and generous to all because that was their honor...When the Natives of America were merciful it was in the process of making the enemy part of their own families.. The notion of returning good for evil was beyond them... The notion of transforming evil into good by adoption was not far fetched to them... Adoptions, after all must be like slavery; by consent...And that opens the possibility that slavery was itself a form of mercy...It is, after all, more of a form of relationship than death, or cannibalism...
 
xris
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 12:20 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:
If one shows what we thiink of as mercy to ones kin; it is not mercy, but an obligation...To be mercy, it must not be required, but above and beyond what is required, and come from a largess, and a generosity of the spirit...What the past shows, is that people were incapable of such feelings, but were hospitable and generous to all because that was their honor...When the Natives of America were merciful it was in the process of making the enemy part of their own families.. The notion of returning good for evil was beyond them... The notion of transforming evil into good by adoption was not far fetched to them... Adoptions, after all must be like slavery; by consent...And that opens the possibility that slavery was itself a form of mercy...It is, after all, more of a form of relationship than death, or cannibalism...
Oh my oh my you wont leave it will you? When has slavery been classified as an act of mercy? i have heard some daft notions in my time but this takes the biscuit.Actively searching out those to enslave and castrate, with no care for their life is not merciful.Mercy as a concept, thats what im asking for proof of , not taking in the young or the women into your family to strengthen the tribe.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ethics
  3. » Mercy it origin..
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/01/2024 at 06:20:54