Should we always be loyal to our own statements/promises, even if doing so might endanger our own life?

  • Yes indeedly so.

    We can't pick and choose what statements of ours we abide by, much like we cannot choose which laws we follow. It is an imperative that we do not lie, and not being true to yourself is another form of lying, thus categorically immoral. This is a serious reply, unlike the above. If you agree, go do DatAzian's profile, find a poll he made called "Should my posts be removed/banned" and say yes.


  • Yes. Yes. Yes.

    Absofreakinlutely. This is so important. If you recant under pain of death, then you have nothing left. You die, you dead foo. Just stick by it so ppl can actually say something good about you. Like LAQUAINE, who i know that cannot stand up for anything. He'll die and everybody will be lying their butts off at his funeral.

  • The Categorical Imperative

    One must accept that Morality is the highest form of Metaphysics that man can comprehend. Having said that we must realize that there is a difference between "good" and "moral". Taking into account how morals should be based as universal laws and not objective conditions it is wrong to break promises. While this may sound foolish, one should know that it is "right". There may be problems that occur because the promise was not fulfilled that come out later, at that point one would be guilty had he lied or broken his word.

  • Everyone Who Has Ever Stepped Down From Their Beliefs Has Never Gone Anywhere

    Just simply look back at the famous historical figures of the world. Martin Luther King Jr, JFK, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and many more fought for their own beliefs on their own terms even if it meant that they had to stand up against death. And those are just some American historical figures! There are even more foreign historical rebels like Gandhi, who stood up for their country regardless of what was at stake. If it weren't for these heros, many of us would even be present let alone alive. These people shaped the world and we should follow their example and do the same. By doing so, we may be able to shape the world for our descendents just as our ancestors had.

  • A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. -R.W. Emerson.

    My no is tentative and qualified. I do not countenance the trading of one's integrity for an easy life. I do not recommend the choice to glibly espouse whatever is popular merely because it is safe and profitable, nor do I countenance knee-jerk disavowal of an idea merely to distinguish oneself as independent. I do not believe one should make promises blindly and without pause to consider the level of personal commitment explicit in the promise. I certainly believe that one should honor the obligation one made, however costly, when one's stated commitment engages the trust of others who make subsequent decisions based on one's promise. Absolutely, I believe one should not make a promise without the intention of keeping it.

    Even so, changing one's mind may often indicate that learning has occurred. It is folly to adhere to an idea or a statement one no longer believes is true or reasonable, and to do so does no credit to anyone. In fact, to do so may hide truth from those who need it, and mislead the trusting.

    If no one else stands to lose by the disavowal of a promise made ignorantly, there is neither sense nor honor in keeping the promise. If the breaking of the promise has a cost only the one who promised, then the choice is between the desires and knowledge of a past self, and the desires and knowledge of the present self. There is no intrinsic virtue in ignoring more accurate and current information merely to fulfill an outdated plan. We learn and grow and change, and the hope is that our actions reflect the learning and growth.

  • No. Refute them again

    To give in under duress is not only sensible, it is necessary.
    To die leaves your point of view without a spokesperson. Tell them anything, and when you have a chance, stand again and refute the brutes! Perhaps some martyrs points survive, but how many just died pointless ly for their beliefs? Would their causes not have benefited from their continued voice?

  • It depends on what you are promising.

    If a person believes in something worth dying for such as religion, or protecting another person then I say yes, but if a person promises a stupid thing or is simply being dared into something then no. A person's life is precious and should only be risked in the most extreme cases.

  • I find that it depends.

    For anyone who has read the philosophical text ''Crito'', by Plato, it is one great question to ask ourselves. If we state that we should always obey the laws, should we obey them to the end, even if those laws are wrong and even if we might face death penalty because of it? That's where the line is drawn between justice and loyalty.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.