The problem with using the crosswalk example is that such a thing is more on par with a contractual term rather than a moral one.
Or, in other words: Violating the crosswalk rule is more of a violation of a standard of practice rather than a moral principle.
When you have enough money, you don't really need to adhere to customs set by other men. You're no longer dependent on others to survive -- if you follow what I mean. So, if you violate someone's personal sensibilities, oh well. It's not going to cost you a meal.
But, someone that doesn't have that financial freedom is more inclined (or willing) to be submissive because it can cost him/her that bare essential.
So, I don't think people are nice and then they become douche-bags because of the money. No, I think people realize they don't have to wear their mask(s) anymore. Just look at the internet when people can hide behind anonymity.
So, no, I don't find that money is the corrupting force here as the video tries to assert.
no subject
Date: 2013-07-29 06:41 pm (UTC)Or, in other words: Violating the crosswalk rule is more of a violation of a standard of practice rather than a moral principle.
When you have enough money, you don't really need to adhere to customs set by other men. You're no longer dependent on others to survive -- if you follow what I mean. So, if you violate someone's personal sensibilities, oh well. It's not going to cost you a meal.
But, someone that doesn't have that financial freedom is more inclined (or willing) to be submissive because it can cost him/her that bare essential.
So, I don't think people are nice and then they become douche-bags because of the money. No, I think people realize they don't have to wear their mask(s) anymore. Just look at the internet when people can hide behind anonymity.
So, no, I don't find that money is the corrupting force here as the video tries to assert.