I refer to the article about a man who created a game indirectly immitating the South Korean killer Seng-Hui Cho following the Virginia Tech massacre.
The article can be found at :
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/printfriendly/0,4139,130691,00.html
Reflection
In the humanities, we learn how to be humane. We learn how to at least empathize or give the minimal concern and respect we could to others. Should Mr Lambourn had learn any humanities at all, I say it has failed. Should he not, he doesn't even deserve to be human. His actions, backed with half baked justifications, failed to earn my respect at all.
The victims of the massacre have had a traumatic experience and deserve their break. Yet what has Mr Lambourn done? Not long after, while these victims are still trying to come to terms with what had happened, to hopefully recover from this psychological trauma, he comes out with a animated replica of what happen, all in the name of fun. Firstly, he does not respect others and secondly, he does not the respect the dead. Aside from the harm he has done to the living, he is now mocking the dead. Outrageous behaivour I say! Under the UN declaration of human rights, an individual can only exercise his freedoms and rights insofar as they do not cause harm to others of violates others rights. In this case, barring the second clause of violating others right, he has cause harm to the people in which he is affected by. Even if we apply utilitarian theory, he still has no right to post such a game online. His actions has caused numerous people world wide to suffer.
However, there a few points that he brought out that I feel is pertinent to society. Firstly, he said that our society only knows how to complain yet do not know how to to act. This is, in my opinion, true of our society. No doubt we do not love and do not accept many things that do no conform to social norms. Yet how many of us dare to stand up and speak out. Though he is right in proving this, I believe his method of doing so is flawed. Secondly, he talks about the whole idea of empathizing with Cho. Frankly speaking, when I first heard about the massacre and Cho's story, I was sympathetic to his cause. I had the experience of being bullied and could therefore understand his reason for action. Yet, though empathetic, I feel that Lambourn should again not have resorted to such inhumane act that can gain him a death sentence in the hearts and minds of others. Again, the toolbox of measures comes in handy. Lambourn could have used any other plausible and practical methods such as writing in forums, anything but this.
To conclude, I feel that Lambourn actions has highlighted certain key and pertinent issues in our society. What we need now is to chanage these issues and at the same time, keep people like Lambourn at bay and not let them take matters into their own hands.
The article can be found at :
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/printfriendly/0,4139,130691,00.html
Reflection
In the humanities, we learn how to be humane. We learn how to at least empathize or give the minimal concern and respect we could to others. Should Mr Lambourn had learn any humanities at all, I say it has failed. Should he not, he doesn't even deserve to be human. His actions, backed with half baked justifications, failed to earn my respect at all.
The victims of the massacre have had a traumatic experience and deserve their break. Yet what has Mr Lambourn done? Not long after, while these victims are still trying to come to terms with what had happened, to hopefully recover from this psychological trauma, he comes out with a animated replica of what happen, all in the name of fun. Firstly, he does not respect others and secondly, he does not the respect the dead. Aside from the harm he has done to the living, he is now mocking the dead. Outrageous behaivour I say! Under the UN declaration of human rights, an individual can only exercise his freedoms and rights insofar as they do not cause harm to others of violates others rights. In this case, barring the second clause of violating others right, he has cause harm to the people in which he is affected by. Even if we apply utilitarian theory, he still has no right to post such a game online. His actions has caused numerous people world wide to suffer.
However, there a few points that he brought out that I feel is pertinent to society. Firstly, he said that our society only knows how to complain yet do not know how to to act. This is, in my opinion, true of our society. No doubt we do not love and do not accept many things that do no conform to social norms. Yet how many of us dare to stand up and speak out. Though he is right in proving this, I believe his method of doing so is flawed. Secondly, he talks about the whole idea of empathizing with Cho. Frankly speaking, when I first heard about the massacre and Cho's story, I was sympathetic to his cause. I had the experience of being bullied and could therefore understand his reason for action. Yet, though empathetic, I feel that Lambourn should again not have resorted to such inhumane act that can gain him a death sentence in the hearts and minds of others. Again, the toolbox of measures comes in handy. Lambourn could have used any other plausible and practical methods such as writing in forums, anything but this.
To conclude, I feel that Lambourn actions has highlighted certain key and pertinent issues in our society. What we need now is to chanage these issues and at the same time, keep people like Lambourn at bay and not let them take matters into their own hands.
posted by m.c.h.i.a. at 11:39 PM
<< Home