« first day (3350 days earlier)      last day (1598 days later) » 

Librarian
Librarian
03:49
0
Q: The War book "THE LONGEST DAY" written by CORNELIUS RYAN

user37920The title contains the names of one war book. "the longest day".THE LONGEST DAY IS A 1959 BOOK BY CORNELIUS RYAN telling the story of D-DAY. it includes details of the first day of the world war 2 invasion of Normandy. It includes details of operation dead stock.on 6th june 1965,the author publis...

discussion support feature-request bug
 
3 hours later…
Librarian
Librarian
06:44
-2
Q: A non-fiction book by Cornelius Ryan-"A bridge too far"

user37920The bridge too far is Arnhem.Arnhem quite literally proved to be a bridge too far. More than 1750 allied soldiers who were killed during operation market garden lie buried at the Airborne cemetery in oosterbeek. They are honored every year on the first Sunday after 17 September. "A bridge too far"...

discussion support feature-request bug
 
4 hours later…
Gareth Rees
Gareth Rees
10:55
@Bookworm It looks as though people are having trouble reading the question.
 
9 hours later…
North Læraðr
North Læraðr
19:35
@GarethRees what do you mean?
Gareth Rees
Gareth Rees
19:45
@NorthLæraðr The question asks specifically for a consideration of Zeus's actions according to the standards of "modern ethics". I'm not certain how worthwhile this exercise is, but nevertheless I do my best to answer the question as it was asked. Comment on my answer, "You can't judge ancient Greeks by today's standards"
North Læraðr
North Læraðr
@GarethRees Yeah, but I think the question itself was a bit dubious
Gareth Rees
Gareth Rees
The other answer completely fails to answer the question, instead going into an apologia for Zeus's crimes. (I hope it is tongue in cheek!)
If you think the question is dubious, then criticize the question, not the answer
North Læraðr
North Læraðr
Yeah, fair point. The other answer is interesting
Answering about "morality" is bit odd, but to be frank, I don't know about legal violations as well
I do get your point about having an objective frame of reference rather than subjective bias
And English Law circa 2020 is fairly similar to most of the world's standards of law, from my understanding
At least those crimes you listed above are also crime in the state where I live
Though the legality of animal fighting varies from state to state in the U.S. (which is honestly just absurd) as well as the punishment.
I disagree that this question should've been in Lit SE in the first place though. If the OP just wants some bad-boy behavior by Zeus, go to mythology SE. Why arbitrarily restrict yourself to just Homer's works? There's work by like Ovid as well
Gareth Rees
Gareth Rees
20:04
It makes interesting legal analysis. When Zeus killed Semele, was that murder or manslaughter?
North Læraðr
North Læraðr
@GarethRees Hm, I'd say manslaughter
Zeus was essentially coerced into doing it
Plus, the definition of murder is that there needs to be malice aforethought, as in, Zeus wanted and intended for her to die. If Zeus could've backed out but he didn't, it would probably constitute as a serious form of manslaughter, but it might be hard to prove that Zeus had malice aforethought
Gareth Rees
Gareth Rees
In most jurisdictions, the "intent" component of murder is broader than that — if you deliberately do an action, and if the death is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of that action, then that's murder. In England and Wales, "if the defendant recognised that death or serious harm would be virtually certain to result from his voluntary act, then that is a fact from which the jury may infer that he intended to kill, even though he may not have had any desire to achieve that result"
North Læraðr
North Læraðr
In America, it's slightly different I think
Depraved-heart murder
In United States law, depraved-heart murder, also known as depraved-indifference murder, is a type of murder where an individual acts with a "depraved indifference" to human life and where such act results in a death, despite that individual not explicitly intending to kill. In a depraved-heart murder, defendants commit an act even though they know their act runs an unusually high risk of causing death or serious bodily harm to a person. If the risk of death or bodily harm is great enough, ignoring it demonstrates a "depraved indifference" to human life and the resulting death is considered to...
Well, it's still murder. Though if it's substantial enough it can pass with "intent to kill"
Gareth Rees
Gareth Rees
20:21
As for being coerced, the common law recognises a defence of duress, but only if the defendant reasonably believed that the action was necessary to avoid death or serious injury. Merely having to break one's oath would not be sufficient
But that's interesting because of what we can infer about how important keeping one's oaths was to the ancient Greeks
North Læraðr
North Læraðr
But violation of the oath upon the Styx is a serious violation
This is stuff that not even the gods could violate
Gareth Rees
Gareth Rees
Well, that's what Zeus says, but is he a credible witness on that point?
North Læraðr
North Læraðr
Perhaps not entirely coerced, but to Zeus, he had no other choice. It would be more ruled as suicide
Zeus did warn his lover
Well, do most gods willfully break their oath upon the Styx?
What happens if you break the oath upon Styx?
Okay so basically you get tortured as a god for who knows how long and lose your privileges as a god, aka, "death" more or less
13
Q: What would happen if you made contradictory vows on the River Styx?

tethernovaIt is said in Greek Mythology that a swear over the river Styx cannot be broken. So what would happen, theoretically of course, if two swears from the same person contradicted one another? For example, suppose I said: "I swear by the river Styx that I will murder my father." and then I said ...

greek
Though it brings up an interesting question: in a situation where it's your life against someone else's, what's the legality on that?
Like for example, someone puts a gun to your head and hands you another gun where you can choose to save yourself by shooting the other person. Is that murder? That's basically the situation here. Such an act constitutes intent (shooting the gun will surely kill the other), but it lacks malice.
Hmm, interesting. US laws on duress constitutes four parts:
1. The threat must be of serious bodily harm or death
2. The threatened harm must be greater than the harm caused by the crime
3. The threat must be immediate and inescapable
4. The defendant must have become involved in the situation through no fault of his own

« first day (3350 days earlier)      last day (1598 days later) »