|
A Moral Dilemna
|
| ZA Bvigil |
Posted on 06/14/2012 14:54:28
|
Admin
Posts: 2161
Joined: 15.11.10
|
NEW QUESTION HERE:
You are a jew hiding out during the middle of the Holocaust you know if you are found you will be killed mercilessly there is a baby in the room with you and it begins to cry uncontrollably and you cannot stop it you have 2 choices let it cry and get caught and the 10 people with you also get killed or smother the baby and kill it
I personally could not ever under any situation kill a child
 |
| |
|
|
| za heystarface |
Posted on 06/14/2012 15:01:37
|
Admin
Posts: 6130
Joined: 20.11.10
|
Yeah me either. I guess we all die together.
 |
| |
|
|
| Carnage |
Posted on 06/14/2012 16:05:04
|
Super Admin
Posts: 4245
Joined: 28.09.11
|
for me, I guess partially because I don't see the attraction that everyone else has to babies and I think babies are pretty much ugly, I probably could kill it to save the rest. Ik im going to hell.
"Hey guys, I just bought this thing called a sight ward...so it's GG." - MasterA in League of Legends
 |
| |
|
|
| The Hat of Love |
Posted on 06/14/2012 16:45:23
|
ShawnPeezy
Posts: 9035
Joined: 31.07.11
|
Carnage wrote:
I don't see the attraction that everyone else has to babies and I think babies are pretty much ugly.
my signature broke, here is a fox snek:
 |
| |
|
|
| za heystarface |
Posted on 06/14/2012 17:01:37
|
Admin
Posts: 6130
Joined: 20.11.10
|
OMG CARNAGE! You are NOT the person I though you were. This must be some imposter Carnage. This is something Shawn would say!
|
| |
|
|
| The Hat of Love |
Posted on 06/14/2012 17:08:53
|
ShawnPeezy
Posts: 9035
Joined: 31.07.11
|
But babies aren't very cute. Are we just cold and heartless? Is it just us?
my signature broke, here is a fox snek:
|
| |
|
|
| FC Wings |
Posted on 06/14/2012 17:39:22
|
Super Admin
Posts: 4425
Joined: 16.11.10
|
The Hat of Love wrote:
Carnage wrote:
I don't see the attraction that everyone else has to babies and I think babies are pretty much ugly. to turn that the other way around all you have to think is that you were once a baby
 |
| |
|
|
| RazNinjaMike |
Posted on 06/14/2012 17:47:47
|
Moderator
Posts: 4586
Joined: 20.11.10
|
i skipped baby phase. i was born a man. and remain as a man...hence why i should be president.... bivigil my answer would be to go down fighting...i would take as many of those bastards (excuse my Italian) as i could... |
| |
|
|
| Carnage |
Posted on 06/14/2012 17:59:59
|
Super Admin
Posts: 4245
Joined: 28.09.11
|
Thats a dumb arguement. I am allowed to dislike something even if I was once it myself. thats like saying im not allowed to dislike size 4 shoes because I used to wear them.
"Hey guys, I just bought this thing called a sight ward...so it's GG." - MasterA in League of Legends
|
| |
|
|
| The Hat of Love |
Posted on 06/14/2012 18:13:59
|
ShawnPeezy
Posts: 9035
Joined: 31.07.11
|
If someone used to be an arsehole and then they become a nice person they have a right to dislike other arseholes if they admit and repent, etc.
So I admit I was a baby once. I'm sorry, please forgive me for that.
my signature broke, here is a fox snek:
|
| |
|
|
| ZA BrickSquad |
Posted on 06/14/2012 18:38:43
|
ShawnPeezy
Posts: 5303
Joined: 12.05.11
|
Wow people, what's wrong with all of you? What's wrong with babies?
Babies are the most innocent things I ever seen. They never do anything bad :/ |
| |
|
|
| Hotpot |
Posted on 06/14/2012 19:51:11
|
Senior Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 25.05.11
|
ninja wrote:
The Hat of Love wrote:
I don't think there's really a case for staying on the same track. Why would you? Because that's what's going to happen anyway? Nah, switch tracks.
By moving the steering wheel to change tracks, you're participating in the outcome of the situation. Thus, the death of that 1 person is your fault.
By comparison, if you do nothing and let the situation unfold without interfering, the deaths are nobody's fault. Thus, you cannot be considered guilty for what happened - it was simply a malfunction of the tram's breaks which caused the death.
Consider, also, how you would explain your actions to the relatives (perhaps the mother?) of that 1 worker.
My response is based on the assumption that the guy have enough time to perceive what is going on on the paths and has enough time to make a split decision whether to change path or not.
Legally speaking (at least according to most U.S. state statues), if the driver switched path, killing that one worker, the driver will be charged with some "intent" to kill that guy, because he/she explicitly and directly commited the action (changing lanes) resulting the death of that one worker. This is considered a voluntary manslaughter (which is not the same as murder btw). However, if the driver stayed on the same lane, causing the death of the five workers, he will be charged with "negligence" or "recklessness" of the killings. Although he did not explicitly "participate" in the killing of the five workers, he is still liable for their deaths, as the driver is driving the vehicle that crashed into them. This is considered as involuntary manslaughter for each worker's death. When comparing individual deaths, voluntary manslaughter carries a heavier prison sentence than an involuntary sentence. Therefore, Ninja, I think your point is based on the (American) legal perspective. Well, best is if the judge understands the driver's difficult dilmma, so the driver can either walk away free or be convicted with a much lighter sentence, regardless of his decision.
Edited by Hotpot on 06/14/2012 20:17:00 |
| |
|
|
| Hotpot |
Posted on 06/14/2012 20:07:31
|
Senior Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 25.05.11
|
However, from my personal moral perspective, not preventing something bad from happening is as damning as causing something bad to happen. Therefore, I personally do not see the differences between changing lane or not changing lane, since either way, the driver cannot stop on time to hit somebody. This is an individual-indivual basis. However, if there is five individuals on one lane but one on the other, if I was the driver, I'll go on the lane with the one individual. For either decision, the result will be terrible, since I will be ending the life of at least one person. But if I have no choice but to choose between two evils, I'll go for the lesser evil. I'll have to crash into that one individual, but with that decision, I will spare the lives of five other individuals on the other lane. This is assuming that all six individuals at peril are strangers and I have no personal relations with any of them. However, if I do know at least one of individuals well (such as a family member), this will definitely factor into my decision.
Edited by Hotpot on 06/14/2012 22:30:03 |
| |
|
|
| za heystarface |
Posted on 06/14/2012 20:43:35
|
Admin
Posts: 6130
Joined: 20.11.10
|
It wouldn't actually be manslaughter if you do not switch lanes because it would not be negligence on behalf of the driver, but rather a no-fault of the driver and perhaps the scheduler of trams and scheduler of workers would need to be investigated.
|
| |
|
|
| tim |
Posted on 06/14/2012 21:23:10
|
Member
Posts: 164
Joined: 09.10.11
|
ZA Bvigil wrote:
NEW QUESTION HERE:
You are a jew hiding out during the middle of the Holocaust you know if you are found you will be killed mercilessly there is a baby in the room with you and it begins to cry uncontrollably and you cannot stop it you have 2 choices let it cry and get caught and the 10 people with you also get killed or smother the baby and kill it
I personally could not ever under any situation kill a child
The scenario you've just described reminds me of the move "The Pianist". Amazing true story of Wladyslaw Szpillman I suggest to watch it sometime.
In the movie a Jewish mother cries and weeps over her dead baby who was crying while the family were hiding away in an attack. The mother tried to muffle the sounds of the cry but ended up smothering the baby to death and in the end they still got caught.
What I'd do is most likely smother the baby and for the tram I'd kill the one person. I probably sound like a complete nutcase but I'd take the life of one to save 9. It probably is a sh*tty thing to do but I guess you've really just got to weigh the odds... one life or several.
As for the family aspect of it, yeah I'd probably do anything to save my family or a loved one so I can't really say anything there. But generally speaking I'd do what needs to be done.
But why can't you just sound off the horn if your on the train??? |
| |
|
|
| Joshkl2013 |
Posted on 06/14/2012 22:40:44
|
Numpty
Posts: 1443
Joined: 26.05.12
|
For the Carnage Hating Babies argument, are you talking about newborns or like, 5 months? Because I agree.. newborns do look kinda ugly...
I wanna be like RAZ!!! [ZÅ]Paradox
Need a shotgun to protect you while you snipe? Call
1-800-SHOTGUN today!
Need a nuke? Call 1-800-NUKE-ALL
Take advantage of this limited offer now!
Offer expires in 3..2..1...
 |
| |
|
|
| ninja |
Posted on 06/15/2012 12:24:02
|
Super Admin
Posts: 4174
Joined: 15.11.10
|
"Why can't you just sound the horn?" "Why don't the workers hear the tram?" It wouldn't be a moral dilemma is these cases, so there would be little point in considering them. I could answer them with things like "the horn is broken" or "they have those ear muffs to protect their ears when drilling", but it doesn't add much to the situation, other than a slight sense of credibility.
Drkinferno wrote:
kill them all, and let god sort them out.... then take their money
How moral. >_>
The Hat of Love wrote:
No, I disagree. By changing tracks, yes, you become guilty of that one person's death. However, by not doing anything, I still think that you are causing the deaths of these people. Whether you like it or not, you're involved. 'How would you explain it to the family of the man?' is an argument sometimes used. But how would you explain to the families of the five men why you didn't switch tracks when you could have? Five times worse.
Consider that the fault occurred on a day when you weren't on a shift so someone else was driving the tram, and that driver didn't make the decision to turn onto the side track. 'Fate' would run its course and the 5 workers who were ever so unlucky to be there at that time would die. It would be no fault of that driver's - just a random malfunction of the tram which was beyond anybody's control. The single worker who had been assigned to a different track was not involved in the fatal accident and wasn't forced to become involved.
However, if it was indeed your shift and you made the concious decision to involve that single worker, the burden of responsibility rests on your shoulders. You can see from the above that they shouldn't be involved. So don't involve them.
Ch@mp10n wrote:
Legally speaking (at least according to most U.S. state statues), if the driver switched path, killing that one worker, the driver will be charged with some "intent" to kill that guy, because he/she explicitly and directly commited the action (changing lanes) resulting the death of that one worker. This is considered a voluntary manslaughter (which is not the same as murder btw). However, if the driver stayed on the same lane, causing the death of the five workers, he will be charged with "negligence" or "recklessness" of the killings. Although he did not explicitly "participate" in the killing of the five workers, he is still liable for their deaths, as the driver is driving the vehicle that crashed into them. This is considered as involuntary manslaughter for each worker's death. When comparing individual deaths, voluntary manslaughter carries a heavier prison sentence than an involuntary sentence. Therefore, Ninja, I think your point is based on the (American) legal perspective. Well, best is if the judge understands the driver's difficult dilmma, so the driver can either walk away free or be convicted with a much lighter sentence, regardless of his decision.
I have very little knowledge of US law, probably since I live in the UK. Thank you for taking the time to explain how this aspect of it works. I was advocating that point just because I find it interesting and wanted to see people's reactions to it. Personally, I would switch tracks.
My brain is open.
- Paul Erdős |
| |
|
|
| The Hat of Love |
Posted on 06/15/2012 12:30:48
|
ShawnPeezy
Posts: 9035
Joined: 31.07.11
|
Why's that Ninja? For the same reason everyone else is?
my signature broke, here is a fox snek:
|
| |
|
|
| ninja |
Posted on 06/15/2012 12:33:22
|
Super Admin
Posts: 4174
Joined: 15.11.10
|
A Parallel Dilemma
You are walking across a bridge and you see a train travelling very fast towards the bridge. You notice that there are 5 workers just around the corner from the bridge. The train will definitely kill them if it is not stopped, and the driver of the train will not have enough time to react by the time he sees the workers (nor will the workers). You notice a very very fat man sitting precariously on the side of the bridge, who would topple onto the tracks if you were to push him. You can be certain that his huge weight would stop the train, thereby preventing the 5 deaths. However, the fat man would die from the impact.
Do you push him?
Is this situation different to the previous? In what way?
My brain is open.
- Paul Erdős |
| |
|
|
| ninja |
Posted on 06/15/2012 12:42:55
|
Super Admin
Posts: 4174
Joined: 15.11.10
|
The Hat of Love wrote:
Why's that Ninja? For the same reason everyone else is?
I suppose it's just intuitively that it seems better. The thing with morals is that it's difficult to place a reason on them - that's why people don't really tend to need to think what is the best decision to make.
I might argue that neither party are directly involved in the accident - it is only the tram tracks which are being chosen between, not the people. So the intent doesn't lie with the people themselves. In this case, from a purely utilitarian point of view the value of 4 more people living potentially happy and fruitful lives must be taken into consideration and accepted as the best course of action. It's "the lesser of two evils".
I'd like to think that I'd be consistent with these moral guidelines when the situation involved my own family/friends, but I doubt I would be. I guess I'm just selfish like that.
My brain is open.
- Paul Erdős |
| |
|
