Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Might makes right" or "Might is right" is an aphorism on the origin of morality, with both descriptive and prescriptive senses. Descriptively, it asserts that a society's view of right and wrong is determined by those in power, with a meaning similar to "History is written by the victors".
The definition of might makes right doesnt care about morality of the winner.You didn't cite a source, but anyway, that's similar to the definition I posted earlier, from Oxford dictionary.
Again, the question is, do you actually agree with that idea?
By that logic, anyone can trample all over anyone else, and as long as they get away with it, what they did was morally right.
The definition of might makes right doesnt care about morality of the winner.
To a Nazi Hitler was a Hero. Was he?
The whole point of "might makes right" is saying it doesn't matter what's right or wrong, the winner decides who's right and it's always them.It appears that you and I are in agreement, but for some strange reason you guys seem to be missing the actual point.
I don't want to keep repeating myself, but I was just curious to know if anyone actually believes in that philosophy.
I could bring up a very common example, but if I do it would take the thread in a different direction and it would be very controversial.
The whole point of "might makes right" is saying it doesn't matter what's right or wrong, the winner decides who's right and it's always them.
But that's false. There are established standards of right and wrong, and might is not right if it goes against them.The whole point of "might makes right" is saying it doesn't matter what's right or wrong, the winner decides who's right and it's always them.
Nobody thinks that if the other "team" is in power.Sigh. OBVIOUSLY!
Ok, so the question you still haven't answered is: Do you think it's true that it doesn't matter? Do you agree that what the winner decides is "right" is always truly right?
Because by that logic, our own government can destroy the constitution and turn this country into a jackbooted thug Police State, and that would be OK because "the winner" decided it was OK.
Might means right never applies to hypothetical situations as you've described, it only applies to things that have already happened.Sigh. OBVIOUSLY!
Ok, so the question you still haven't answered is: Do you think it's true that it doesn't matter? Do you agree that what the winner decides is "right" is always truly right?
Because by that logic, our own government can destroy the constitution and turn this country into a jackbooted thug Police State, and that would be OK because "the winner" decided it was OK.
Might means right never applies to hypothetical situations as you've described, it only applies to things that have already happened.
Nobody thinks that if the other "team" is in power.
That's why so many leftist posters here are fine with the assassination attempt on Trump. They can't let him win. If there's a chance he can win, they are fine with murder
You don't understand what might means right means, and I'm trying to explain it to you. It's not my fault you refuse to listen.
I'm sorry, but you are impossible to have a conversation with. I feel like I'm talking to someone from another planet.
You don't understand what might means right means, and I'm trying to explain it to you. It's not my fault you refuse to listen.
Simple. I DISAGREE with the statement you're harping on. "Might make right."First of all, why would you thumb down my post #26
The left doesn't agree with your "established standards". They're as convinced of theirs every but as much as you're convinced of yours.But that's false. There are established standards of right and wrong, and might is not right if it goes against them.
Simple. I DISAGREE with the statement you're harping on. "Might make right."
Second. As I pointed out, nobody really does.
But is there anyone here who actually believes that might makes right? In other words, is there anyone here who actually believes that mere physical strength and possession of power morally justifies anything that person with power does with it?
Why would you assume anything else. But, like I said, nobody really does. EVERYBODY thinks they're doing the right thing -- including the Patsy who took a few shots at the president, including the animals who raided Israeli villages October 7th, and including the anti-Trump zealots who could hardly contain their approval of Trump's attempted assassination.Well if you disagree with might makes right, then you and I are in agreement
Here’s a definition, for anyone who isn’t sure what it means. According to Oxford English Dictionary...
might is right (also might makes right and variants) : the possession of power, rather than any moral consideration, determines the legitimacy of an action, policy, etc.
