Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology Forum - Perennial Ideas and Debates that cross societal/time boundaries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 28th, 2012, 08:34 AM   #11

History Chick's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2010
From: PA
Posts: 2,184

Quote:
Originally Posted by philosopher View Post
Why is cowardice punishable?

Its not something people can control.

If you cannot control it, you can't avoid it.
Is it definitely something that can't be controlled? I have never studied the psychology or science behind it but it seems to me that if one person can master and face their fears, why shouldn't the next person be able to? I see a lot of responses in relation to military situations but cowardice can be seen in any aspect of life which is challenging or scary.

For example, I've seen people in relationships who want to break it off but don't have the guts to be "the bad guy" and so they start sabotaging it in hopes their partner will get sick of it and end things instead. That's cowardice. Are you really suggesting that this kind of behavior should be acceptable?

Whether it's always fair or not, I can't help but think "just grow a pair" sometimes.
History Chick is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 28th, 2012, 08:39 AM   #12

bartieboy's Avatar
.
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: The Netherlands
Posts: 6,270
Blog Entries: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by History Chick View Post
Is it definitely something that can't be controlled? I have never studied the psychology or science behind it but it seems to me that if one person can master and face their fears, why shouldn't the next person be able to? I see a lot of responses in relation to military situations but cowardice can be seen in any aspect of life which is challenging or scary.

For example, I've seen people in relationships who want to break it off but don't have the guts to be "the bad guy" and so they start sabotaging it in hopes their partner will get sick of it and end things instead. That's cowardice. Are you really suggesting that this kind of behavior should be acceptable?

Whether it's always fair or not, I can't help but think "just grow a pair" sometimes.
There is that and there are the guys who are expected to go over the edge and run in to fixed enemy positions.
Would you tell them to grow a pair?
Certain things just go against your human nature.
For good reason by the way because charging an enemy position is quite a dangerous venture.
bartieboy is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 08:54 AM   #13
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,653

Quote:
Originally Posted by bartieboy View Post
There is that and there are the guys who are expected to go over the edge and run in to fixed enemy positions.
Would you tell them to grow a pair?
Certain things just go against your human nature.
For good reason by the way because charging an enemy position is quite a dangerous venture.
It is dangerous, but not nearly as dangerous as being in an army that refuses to follow orders. When you don't do your part against the enemy, that frees up their soldiers to fight more effectively against other units in your military, if a large enough unit turns tail and runs an entire army can be lost. The acts of a coward in war are not victimless crimes, others will die when cowards refuse to follow, cowards are murderers to their fellow soldiers and in aiding the enemy by refusing orders are traitors to their army and nation. I guess we could have a discussion on whether or not we should punish treason or murder, but if either are worthy of punishment it seems to follow naturally that cowardice is as well.
constantine is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 08:58 AM   #14

bartieboy's Avatar
.
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: The Netherlands
Posts: 6,270
Blog Entries: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by constantine View Post
It is dangerous, but not nearly as dangerous as being in an army that refuses to follow orders. When you don't do your part against the enemy, that frees up their soldiers to fight more effectively against other units in your military, if a large enough unit turns tail and runs an entire army can be lost. The acts of a coward in war are not victimless crimes, others will die when cowards refuse to follow, cowards are murderers to their fellow soldiers and in aiding the enemy by refusing orders are traitors to their army and nation. I guess we could have a discussion on whether or not we should punish treason or murder, but if either are worthy of punishment it seems to follow naturally that cowardice is as well.
I think that sometimes I would wonder, is it worth it? after all, in a lot of wars the majority of the male population is called up on to defend their country. But who is this country? for a large part it's the men who are fighting in the front lines.
Just a theory that has been in my head for a few hours...
bartieboy is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 09:13 AM   #15
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,653

Quote:
Originally Posted by bartieboy View Post
I think that sometimes I would wonder, is it worth it? after all, in a lot of wars the majority of the male population is called up on to defend their country. But who is this country? for a large part it's the men who are fighting in the front lines.
Just a theory that has been in my head for a few hours...
Which is why I'm not a big fan of conscription, you should at least have some measure of choice, even if the choice is charging to your death or staying home to watch the enemy burn your lands and rape and murder your family. But in the end, war is not a civilized endeavour, it's largely a suspension of the ideals of civilization in favor of the ancient right of conquest.
constantine is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 09:16 AM   #16

bartieboy's Avatar
.
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: The Netherlands
Posts: 6,270
Blog Entries: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by constantine View Post
Which is why I'm not a big fan of conscription, you should at least have some measure of choice, even if the choice is charging to your death or staying home to watch the enemy burn your lands and rape and murder your family. But in the end, war is not a civilized endeavour, it's largely a suspension of the ideals of civilization in favor of the ancient right of conquest.
Yes but how many enemies really want to burn your lands, rape and murder?
Why would I resist to the Germans if they would invade my country again?
I wouldn't be any worse off, the Germans are decent people, and the only reason why I would fight them would be for national pride... Which in my opinion is a silly thing to die for.

Do you think your life would be THAT much different if Belgium took over the USA?
bartieboy is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 10:10 AM   #17
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,653

Quote:
Originally Posted by bartieboy View Post
Yes but how many enemies really want to burn your lands, rape and murder?
Why would I resist to the Germans if they would invade my country again?
I wouldn't be any worse off, the Germans are decent people, and the only reason why I would fight them would be for national pride... Which in my opinion is a silly thing to die for.

Do you think your life would be THAT much different if Belgium took over the USA?
How many countries are seriously considering invading their neighbour right now? Of those who do, I think rape, murder, and pillage are in the cards for them.

The Germans tend to be a lot nicer when they want to trade with you than when they want to occupy you...judging from the Congo, perhaps the same can be said of the Belgians (and it could also be said of the US as well). Now, if you're talking about a semi-peaceful annexation, you may have a point.

Belgium resisted the Kaiser during WWI, was it truly in their self interest? Maybe, maybe not, but they paid a high price for it all the same. At times national pride and self interest will conflict, in which case it should be up to the people to make their own choice in the matter. All wars and all enemies are not the same, the weight of the decision will vary with each one.
constantine is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 10:45 AM   #18
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Denmark
Posts: 1,582

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongo View Post
The whole point is to give the coward something to fear more than the enemy.
In the months before I was disqualified for the draft, I actually thought about using my gun to commit suicide. I had a well-thought through plan. As soon as I was to be left alone with a gun and a bullet, I'd do it.

Some people have called that an over-reaction. I call it a choice.

For some reason I was never drafted... they didn't even want to see me.
But if I ever happen to get drafted, or in any other situation lose my current life style, cowardice is no problem for me.
philosopher is offline  
Old November 28th, 2012, 10:51 AM   #19

Rasta's Avatar
Spiritual Ronin
 
Joined: Aug 2009
From: Minnesnowta
Posts: 19,585

Quote:
Originally Posted by philosopher View Post
In the months before I was disqualified for the draft, I actually thought about using my gun to commit suicide. I had a well-thought through plan. As soon as I was to be left alone with a gun and a bullet, I'd do it.

Some people have called that an over-reaction. I call it a choice.

For some reason I was never drafted... they didn't even want to see me.
Thank the gods. Have you considered professional help?
Rasta is online now  
Old November 28th, 2012, 10:56 AM   #20
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: Denmark
Posts: 1,582

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasta View Post
Thank the gods. Have you considered professional help?
So they can draft me?
philosopher is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology

Tags
cowardice, punishable


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.