-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Hypothetical Situation Question - Morality
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
maddogchen
Diamond Member
blood is still on the hands of the evil mastermind in my book.
As for killing an innocent to save hundreds. The end does not justify the means.
eits
Lifer
? how did we get to the issue of God's existence? ???
look, it's not difficult to understand. if you kill this one guy, you will be saving the lives of hundreds of innocent people... some of whom might even be your friends or family. this isn't a debate about God's existence. this is a debate about what would you do given this certain scenario.
what you're trying to do is go outside of the hypothetical scenario. the question is do you or don't you. if you do, you save hundreds. if you don't, you sentence hundreds of innocent people to death, thereby having their blood on your hands. in either scenario, any normal person would be haunted for years... which is the goal of the evil mastermind. is it easier to get over killing somebody to save the lives of hundreds or is it easier for you to get over saying "not my problem" and knowing that hundreds died because you didn't hero up.
IronWing
No Lifer
Hero up?
Edit:
The problem with whacking someone with a shovel is that you would being doing so based on hearsay. This is very similar to being a soldier being told "That guy over there is developing WMDs that could kill lots of folks if you don't do something so go kill him". So you go kill the guy only to find out that the person who told you about the WMDs was full of crap and wanted the guy whacked to advance his own agenda.
Edit:
The problem with whacking someone with a shovel is that you would being doing so based on hearsay. This is very similar to being a soldier being told "That guy over there is developing WMDs that could kill lots of folks if you don't do something so go kill him". So you go kill the guy only to find out that the person who told you about the WMDs was full of crap and wanted the guy whacked to advance his own agenda.
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
Yes, it is easy to understand even though you've attempted to change the scenario you originally posted. I have already said the blood of the rest of the people would not be on my hands because I would not be the one to kill them.
I am not saying "not my problem." In this scenario it is my problem and I choose to not kill the next person to pass. So, by your scenario, we all die. In my book, heroes do whats right in spite of the horrendous result.
irishScott
Lifer
Giving into madmen and terrorists for any reason sets a precedent that could very well kill thousands over time.
irishScott
Lifer
The problem with these hypotheticals is the same as the zen master/boy with horse stories.
A boy gets a horse for his birthday, and the whole village says that's wonderful. The zen master says: We'll see.
The boy falls off his horse a few days later and breaks his leg, and everyone says that's horrible, the zen master says: We'll see.
Then the village goes to war, and all of the young men are shipped off. The boy can't go because of his leg. Everyone says he's lucky. The zen master says: We'll see.
A boy gets a horse for his birthday, and the whole village says that's wonderful. The zen master says: We'll see.
The boy falls off his horse a few days later and breaks his leg, and everyone says that's horrible, the zen master says: We'll see.
Then the village goes to war, and all of the young men are shipped off. The boy can't go because of his leg. Everyone says he's lucky. The zen master says: We'll see.
irishScott
Lifer
So to reiterate my post above, what if your action sets a precedent that ends up killing thousands over time?
S
SlitheryDee
I think you're missing the point of the exercise here. If it helps imagine that there is no evil mastermind, but a situation occurs by no one's intention in which you are in a position to save a great number of lives by sacrificing one. Now there is no conundrum about dealing with madmen. You can save the one or you can save the many but not both at the same time. In order to save the many you must do something horrible to the one, say cut his arm off or something (I'll leave the why out of it). There are no alternate solutions, no loopholes. Do you save the one or the many?
irishScott
Lifer
Or do you save many, and kill many more by that action?
The reason we don't negotiate with terrorists is because setting such a precedent would increase terrorist activity and ultimately result in a larger loss of life.
S
SlitheryDee
No terrorists. See bold. Just a plain ol' unlucky, tragic accident in which a hard decision would save either one life or many.
irishScott
Lifer
Oh, well then yeah. I agree. Reading comprehension ftl. 😱
Edit: That said, if it was family or someone I care deeply about, I probably wouldn't do it.
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
The details are very important. There is no such thing as a generic situation in this regard. I have stated my beliefs and reasoning at least twice now. Perhaps it is hard for you to imagine someone willing to sacrifice the many for a principle but I am such a person.
destrekor
Lifer
if thats the case, it still depends.
if letting one person die and a whole bunch of people will be saved, then I think I could do that.
if that one person who had to die was part of my bloodline, and they could be saved... sorry, family comes first in my book. May be greedy, but to me, the I feel the most important thing for a man is the continued existence of two things: his family and his home/homeland.
But I also have plenty of other views about civilization/anthropology, life, and the current state of failure mankind is in... these heavily weigh into my current views on life in general. 😉
edit:
also, this scenario or any twist of it, requires one to accept defeat. I have trouble accepting failure in anything I do, I'm very hard on myself, so most likely situation would be risking the group to save my family member, but at the same time putting both my life at risk and my family members to try and save as much of the group as possible... one likely outcome of this is everyone dies. But then I don't have to deal with the mental trauma that would come later in life that would stem from such an experience. 😉
+
MagnusTheBrewer
IN MEMORIAM
The details of the situation do matter. The two situations are not analogous. A decision can not be made in a vacuum. Situational ethics do exist which is why I brought God into it before. Whether you or, others believe or no, if I am the one making the decision it would be my beliefs that guide my reaction.
S
SlitheryDee
The idea of questions like these is to try and force someone to decide in a situation where they can't win completely IMO. It's more to find out about what kind of person YOU are than any scenario. The question is just the tool used to make someone decide.
In order to view and respond properly to the question you should go ahead and accept the idea that either the passengers or the next person to walk by MUST die and they will die as a direct consequence of YOUR actions. There will be blood on your hands regardless. Now , do you distinguish between the blood of the few and the many or not? The train and the shovel and the evil mastermind are just devices designed to take any possible power out of your hands in the hypothetical situation besides the essential choice.
Nevertheless it seems that people still got hung up on the details and derailed the question, hence my attempt to create a generic situation without the aspects that seemed to stick in everyone's collective craw.
Mo0o
Lifer
It's slightly different in my opinion because in choosing to do nothing, you're not physically killing anyone, only letting people die through inaction. If that counts as "having blood on your hands" then all of the developed world has "blood on their hands" by living the rich life style that we do while the rest of the world blows so much ass. Just a difference that i thought was important to point out. Inaction leading to someone's death is different from you actually killing them.
DangerAardvark
Diamond Member
This is rudimentary game theory. If you have to pull a lever that diverts the train so it hits the guy and causes the train to stop before it goes off a cliff, 99% of people will do it. If you have to PUSH that person on the track, 99% of people won't. Logically, it's the same action.
Inaction on a global scale is much difference than inaction right in front of you. Would you stand by and watch a woman get gang raped? By your logic, you could just turn around and walk away without feeling the slightest moral qualm. Saying something as broad as "the ends do not justify the means" and then trying to apply it across the board to every situation is ludicrous. There are many, many situations in which inaction is immoral; where pacifism is as evil as actively committing a crime.
Inaction on a global scale is much difference than inaction right in front of you. Would you stand by and watch a woman get gang raped? By your logic, you could just turn around and walk away without feeling the slightest moral qualm. Saying something as broad as "the ends do not justify the means" and then trying to apply it across the board to every situation is ludicrous. There are many, many situations in which inaction is immoral; where pacifism is as evil as actively committing a crime.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
