"I Missed The Part Where That's My Problem?"

[Ethel mermania]

The moral question works better without it though. With uncle Ben dying there is an emotional component to the answer, pull him out, that pull goes away and back to "what is moral".

Certainly, but IM can't choose to do that and then also try and use Peter's guilt for his Uncle's death as justification for us to feel guilt/regret now.

He ended up regretting it though

It's very obvious Peter regretted it because Uncle Ben died. I'm sure some people might feel bad about letting a robber get past even if nothing happens after the fact, but IM cannot specifically use Peter's guilt/regret to suggest we all should feel guilt/regret in this scenario because IM has removed Uncle Ben's death from the entire scenario.

Fair.

[Ifreann]

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

That’s Uncle-Ben-ian propaganda

He said that, but he isn't the only person to have ever had the idea.

[Kannap]

That’s Uncle-Ben-ian propaganda

He said that, but he isn't the only person to have ever had the idea.

Uncle Ben was working on getting a copyright on it but he died before he had the chance.

[Cokoland]

I'll go to the robber and take the money with him while carrying him on my lap and running in the sunset like an 80's romantic comedy

Nobody said I can't chose the second option while being wholesome.

[The Blaatschapen]

Pulling out Uncle Ben is why Ben doesn't have any kids of his own.

SHAME!, you should feel shame for that one.

I don't feel shame with regard to uncle Ben anymore after the last incident:

viewtopic.php?p=35177173#p35177173

[Infected Mushroom]

That’s Uncle-Ben-ian propaganda

He said that, but he isn't the only person to have ever had the idea.

Are you saying he stole it from a western philosopher?

[Ifreann]

He said that, but he isn't the only person to have ever had the idea.

Are you saying he stole it from a western philosopher?

No. It's just a common idea. It's even in the Bible. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

[Kannap]

He said that, but he isn't the only person to have ever had the idea.

Are you saying he stole it from a western philosopher?

I don't know if we know the exact origins of the concept, but Spiderman's writers certainly didn't make it up. A quick Google search:

It resembles Luke 12:48 from the Bible, "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."

In 1793, we have a writing from the French National Convention that reads, "Ils doivent envisager qu'une grande responsabilité est la suite inséparable d'un grand pouvoir" ("They [the Representatives] must contemplate that a great responsibility is the inseparable result of a great power")

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

In 1899, U.S. President William McKinley said in his SOTU Address: "Presented to this Congress are great opportunities. With them come great responsibilities."

In 1906, Under-Secretary Winston Churchill said, "Where there is great power, there is great responsibility"

And, in terms of superheros, in a 15-part film serial "Superman" in 1948, Eben Kent tells Clark Kent, "Because of these great powers - your speed and strength, your x-ray vision and super-sensitive hearing - you have great responsibility."

I don't know if the Bible verse in Luke is the origin of the idea or if the idea far predates the Bible (it probably does), but it certainly far predates the Spiderman comics first usage of the phrase in the 1960s; even in term of superheros, Superman hit it first.

[Infected Mushroom]

Are you saying he stole it from a western philosopher?

I don't know if we know the exact origins of the concept, but Spiderman's writers certainly didn't make it up. A quick Google search:

It resembles Luke 12:48 from the Bible, "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."

In 1793, we have a writing from the French National Convention that reads, "Ils doivent envisager qu'une grande responsabilité est la suite inséparable d'un grand pouvoir" ("They [the Representatives] must contemplate that a great responsibility is the inseparable result of a great power")

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

In 1899, U.S. President William McKinley said in his SOTU Address: "Presented to this Congress are great opportunities. With them come great responsibilities."

In 1906, Under-Secretary Winston Churchill said, "Where there is great power, there is great responsibility"

And, in terms of superheros, in a 15-part film serial "Superman" in 1948, Eben Kent tells Clark Kent, "Because of these great powers - your speed and strength, your x-ray vision and super-sensitive hearing - you have great responsibility."

I don't know if the Bible verse in Luke is the origin of the idea or if the idea far predates the Bible (it probably does), but it certainly far predates the Spiderman comics first usage of the phrase in the 1960s; even in term of superheros, Superman hit it first.

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

This.

I’d say this is most clearly the source.

[Infected Mushroom]

Are you saying he stole it from a western philosopher?

No. It's just a common idea. It's even in the Bible. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

I like Uncle Ben’s phrasing better

[The Free Joy State]

No. It's just a common idea. It's even in the Bible. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

I like Uncle Ben’s phrasing better

Subsequent rephrasings of someone else's idea are often pithier than the original.

Through Kannap's history of the same sentiment, from the Bible to the present, you could see the phrase generally getting shorter and snappier.

[Ifreann]

All of which is to say, people can answer that they think that in this situation they have a responsibility to act because of their superpowers and the absence of Ben Parker has no bearing on that.

[The Blaatschapen]

I don't know if we know the exact origins of the concept, but Spiderman's writers certainly didn't make it up. A quick Google search:

It resembles Luke 12:48 from the Bible, "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."

In 1793, we have a writing from the French National Convention that reads, "Ils doivent envisager qu'une grande responsabilité est la suite inséparable d'un grand pouvoir" ("They [the Representatives] must contemplate that a great responsibility is the inseparable result of a great power")

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

In 1899, U.S. President William McKinley said in his SOTU Address: "Presented to this Congress are great opportunities. With them come great responsibilities."

In 1906, Under-Secretary Winston Churchill said, "Where there is great power, there is great responsibility"

And, in terms of superheros, in a 15-part film serial "Superman" in 1948, Eben Kent tells Clark Kent, "Because of these great powers - your speed and strength, your x-ray vision and super-sensitive hearing - you have great responsibility."

I don't know if the Bible verse in Luke is the origin of the idea or if the idea far predates the Bible (it probably does), but it certainly far predates the Spiderman comics first usage of the phrase in the 1960s; even in term of superheros, Superman hit it first.

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

This.

I’d say this is most clearly the source.

A guy named Lamb, of course.

And I agree. With great power comes great respunsability.

[Kannap]

I don't know if we know the exact origins of the concept, but Spiderman's writers certainly didn't make it up. A quick Google search:

It resembles Luke 12:48 from the Bible, "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."

In 1793, we have a writing from the French National Convention that reads, "Ils doivent envisager qu'une grande responsabilité est la suite inséparable d'un grand pouvoir" ("They [the Representatives] must contemplate that a great responsibility is the inseparable result of a great power")

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

In 1899, U.S. President William McKinley said in his SOTU Address: "Presented to this Congress are great opportunities. With them come great responsibilities."

In 1906, Under-Secretary Winston Churchill said, "Where there is great power, there is great responsibility"

And, in terms of superheros, in a 15-part film serial "Superman" in 1948, Eben Kent tells Clark Kent, "Because of these great powers - your speed and strength, your x-ray vision and super-sensitive hearing - you have great responsibility."

I don't know if the Bible verse in Luke is the origin of the idea or if the idea far predates the Bible (it probably does), but it certainly far predates the Spiderman comics first usage of the phrase in the 1960s; even in term of superheros, Superman hit it first.

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

This.

I’d say this is most clearly the source.

If you ignore the two sources we have that predate that source, I guess so. But why would you do that?

[The Two Jerseys]

I'm simply pointing out that the results of the poll would seem to show that morality on NSG is different from morality in Spider-Man, something I didn't expect because I thought posters would largely agree with the great power comes with great responsibility ideology

Spider Man let the guy go past. The majority decided to do exactly what Spider Man did and without an Uncle Ben there's no reason to think further then that.

Plus how many of the people who voted to stop the robber are doing so only so they could rob him in turn?

[Ethel mermania]

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

This.

I’d say this is most clearly the source.

A guy named Lamb, of course.

And I agree. With great power comes great respunsability.

Stealing your own material.....tsk tsk.

[Ethel mermania]

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

This.

I’d say this is most clearly the source.

If you ignore the two sources we have that predate that source, I guess so. But why would you do that?

He likes Lambs.

[Infected Mushroom]

In 1817, British MP William Lamb said, "the possession of great power necessarily implies great responsibility."

This.

I’d say this is most clearly the source.

If you ignore the two sources we have that predate that source, I guess so. But why would you do that?

There are a number of factors. It's in English (I doubt the English writer would copy across language). Also, the phrasing is the closest.

[Eahland]

According to the Marvel Super Heroes Players' Book, p. 37, "Stop/Prevent Robbery" is +20 Karma. "Permit Robbery" is -10 Karma. "Commit Robbery" isn't on the table for some reason, but based on the costs of committing other crimes, it should probably be -40 Karma. Most of my stats are Incredible (40) or higher, with my lowest being Good (10) Intuition, which means it'll take a crapton of Karma to actually advance anything, and I'm already down a fair bit for using my superpowers to beat the crap out of an ordinary human earlier.

So it's clearly a better deal to stop the robbery and return the money than to permit it or to take the money myself and hope to scrounge up some Karma in role-playing awards.

There's no real risk in any case... with Amazing Agility and Combat Sense, I can literally dodge bullets, and failing that I have more than enough Health to just tank pistol shots.

Karma’s a huge theme when Stan Lee is in charge. But in the IM Verse, it may work a bit differently

You need the Karma because it's both the experience points you use to improve your stats, and the metagame "luck" currency that you need to actually succeed at basically anything ever. And you need hefty piles of it for both purposes.

For instance, as I mentioned, Spidey's lowest stat is his Good (10) Intuition. Raising it to the bottom of the next rank, Excellent (16), takes 1150 Karma (not a typo, that is actually one thousand one hundred and fifty Karma). Raising higher stats costs more, and all of Spidey's other stats are higher than his Intuition. Raising his Amazing (50) Agility to Monstrous (63) would cost 7680 Karma.

With great stats comes great Karma-whoring. Better get stopping robberies... at 20 a pop, you're gonna need more than one.

Especially since you're already down like 70 Karma from gambling on your ability to beat down an ordinary human with your superpowers.

Karma can also be spent to improve your chances of success, at 1 Karma per 1% improvement. This can pretty quickly add up to significant amounts, especially since your chances of success aren't that great unless you have really awesome stats. Spider-Man's Amazing Agility — which is pretty darn respectable — only gives him a 75% chance of basic Green FEAT success on Agility tests, and a lot of more difficult tests need Yellow or Red FEATs for success. If you've got a test you've really got to make, like say hitting that skyscraper with your web so you don't fall to your doom, you can easily blow more Karma than you get for stopping a simple robbery on one check.

Especially if your stats aren't as Amazing as Spidey's. With lousy stats comes great Karma-whoring, too. That's probably why Uncle Ben was trying to stop the robber. With his ordinary-human stats, probably Typical (5) across the board, he needed the Karma so everything he ever tried to do wasn't a coin-flip, or worse, chance of success.

[UniversalCommons]

This is a public cage match. It will cost him a lot more money if you simply inform the public that you were not paid the publicly announced amount Besides a cage match for $3000 is not enough, you can end up with a hospital bill for a lot more than that in a cage match. Don't take the $100. Go after the robber turn over the money to the police. It was after all a robbery and it needs to be confirmed. It is physical evidence. You are a witness to a double failure. Not properly getting paid, and not properly managing your money. Tsk, tsk. If the manager lays hands on you, you have assault added to it. You can probably slap him around a bit. Self defense, you after all a teenager and he is a grown man.

[Ifreann]

If you ignore the two sources we have that predate that source, I guess so. But why would you do that?

There are a number of factors. It's in English (I doubt the English writer would copy across language). Also, the phrasing is the closest.

You've concluded that this phrase was copied from a British MP in 1817 by American writers in 1962, based on nothing more than the phrasing being similar.

Walk me through why you think that Stan Lee and Steve Ditko must have been reading 145 year old British parliamentary records when they were working on Spider-Man.

[Kannap]

If you ignore the two sources we have that predate that source, I guess so. But why would you do that?

There are a number of factors. It's in English (I doubt the English writer would copy across language). Also, the phrasing is the closest.

That's not how origins work. Everybody who's said it since the first time has been shortening the phrase into something snappier and wittier, something that sounds easier to say and better to the ears.

You don't just throw away the source material when trying to find out the origin of a phrase. The earliest written record of the concept is in the Bible, and the concept probably very well predates the Bible anyway.

[Kannap]

There are a number of factors. It's in English (I doubt the English writer would copy across language). Also, the phrasing is the closest.

You've concluded that this phrase was copied from a British MP in 1817 by American writers in 1962, based on nothing more than the phrasing being similar.

Walk me through why you think that Stan Lee and Steve Ditko must have been reading 145 year old British parliamentary records when they were working on Spider-Man.

You could tell me one or both of them were Christians and it would make more sense.

[Alcala-Cordel]

Not if they were gonna kill uncle Ben, but considering he's not in this scenario I'm not gonna do anything. Why would I risk getting shot to help someone like that?

[Eahland]

Not if they were gonna kill uncle Ben, but considering he's not in this scenario I'm not gonna do anything. Why would I risk getting shot to help someone like that?

Because the robber is a public threat (or menace?), and stopping him is the right thing to do regardless of the identity of his current victim? Because, despite IM's protestations, you can't know in advance that he's not going to kill Uncle Ben or some other innocent bystander? Because you're Spider-Man, and there is no actual risk because you have a precognitive danger sense and superhuman speed and agility, and so can literally dodge bullets? Because with great power comes great responsibility? Because you want to kick his ass and take the money for yourself?