The Mission (1986) 📽️ Panel Discussion

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 18 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 4

  • @meritocracyavenue9087
    @meritocracyavenue9087 2 роки тому +2

    I appreciated all the panelist comments. Professor O'Connor gave us a blueprint on how to approach a dilemma and the instruction to define the different set of ethics the archetypes of any story or event, and how they conduct their lives accordingly to those ethics. He demostrated the threshold of an organised thought process to reach a rational conclusion /decision. How do you eat an Elephant? Bite by bite. When we approach an overwhelming dilemma we need to know how to take the problem apart to find the premise therefore to determine the error or first error so we can correct the errors resulting in a solution.

  • @marklieberman8362
    @marklieberman8362 2 роки тому +3

    The Guanani Indians killed their third child because each parent could only run from the slave poachers with one child each. Yet, the Indians subject to slavery, were called animals. The panel addresses this issue as the aggressors (Spanish and Portuguese Crowns) justify their sins as they vilify their victims (insult to injury). We see this in different historical events. Such as anytime genocide is committed and in times of war. We also see it in political and personal character assassinations to discredit the truthteller. Thinking men avoid war. They find solutions. Ideological advocates sacrifice without a solution. Warriors fight even if they can't win without a solution. Lessons to be learned is definitely in regards that Moral Ethics is the thinking man's tool to which solutions are crafted. Boundaries should be absolute. Such as Do not murder. Murder is not a Moral Ethic and should never be an option. Yet, when forced the Guanani had to in order to prevent the whole family from being enslaved. But who is at fault here? The Guanani Indians for killing their third child or the poachers that cause them to have to make that decision? Self-preservation is human nature and is what keeps our species from total self -destruction.

  • @jennifergarvin-sanchez4335
    @jennifergarvin-sanchez4335 2 роки тому +1

    Interesting discussion, but I wish the ethics prof would have talked more, because he knew what he was talking about. Also, people would have benefited more from understanding the context of when the movie was made and what they were trying to speak to, i.e., the Central American wars.

  • @stanleydolan5609
    @stanleydolan5609 2 роки тому +2

    The lessons lost , not the inhumanity being capable of toward fellow human beings , but the capitulation of allowing to turning a blind eye to it.The representative for the Vatican capitulation for knowing that preordained decision and guilt he must be burdened to bear. The Vatican discarded those people, the Jesuit priest, their order. The native Americans in California to this day being the latest the Chinese Christians knowingly. The CCP’s distain after seeing the Solidarity movement in Poland. The Winter Olympics , the leaders allowing athletes to attend, knowing the crimes against humanity against their own citizens. I have seen with my own two eyes the respect given by Buddhist toward Christians, being raised Roman Catholic was ashamed. The US has in its past and present shown the capitulation to devaluation of human life. What explanation for that mindset or reasoning, power ,control, established order . Nothing could be used as excuse for it . Lesson learned for as long as people treat others as something being used for personal gain, instead treating others as human beings, the problem remains and not accepted , which is the first step needed to be taken.