Previous
1
2
3
4
Next

Read Discussion
Reply to All

1

Morality- which is the better choice?

Forums: Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

joefromchicago wrote:

Why would that be the right thing to do?

Because if I don't know any other variables in the situation, I simply have to look at the my 1 life versus their 50.

0 Replies

Foley wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:
Why would that be the right thing to do?

Because if I don't know any other variables in the situation, I simply have to look at the my 1 life versus their 50.

Why would their fifty lives be "worth" more than yours?

0 Replies

Yeah... I'm anxious to know that too...

0 Replies

I'll assuage your anxiety.

Spock - "The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few, or the one." Spock risked his life to save the ship because he reasoned it was an acceptable risk/reward given his responsibilities as second in command.

Kirk - "Sometimes the needs of the few outwiegh the needs of the many." Kirk risked the ship to save Spock's life because he believed his responsibilities as a friend merited the risk to the ship.

All better now?

0 Replies

Spock did have a responsibility as the second in command.

And Kirk did have a responsibility as a friend.

But in the case we're debating there is no such responsibility.

Though if the Klingons decided to attack us I suppose one casualty from one foton torpedo is better than fifty...

0 Replies

You want me to be irreverent and relevant?
Did you mean futon or photon?

0 Replies

Well, one must be at least reverent if one is a Trekkie.

0 Replies

Re: Morality- which is the better choice?

Cyracuz wrote:

What's your mettle? I asked this question in another thread, and Eorl suggested that it might be fun to have it in a thread of it's own. So here goes:

Imagine that 50 people you don't know personally are in mortal danger. If you do nothing they will die. You have a chance to save them, but to do that you must die yourself.
What do you do?

I'll come back in a while and tell you what I would do.

Knowing me, I would anguish over what to do, turning it over and over in my mind until it was too late, and all my friends were dead. Then I'd go get a pizza. Extra cheese.

0 Replies

kicky

Don't sweat it. They were not your friends.

Chumly

I meant photon... I don't think a futon torpedo would do much harm, unless the target suffered from dust allergies...

0 Replies

0 Replies

snookered wrote:

You insinuate you were in vietnam. I'd be will to bet that you weren't in combat.

I was assigned to the 25th Surg--more than that i will not say, because my private life is not your business, and i think you do a disservice to others to give their names without their express prior consent.

Phoenix's remarks had to do with people she stipulated she did not know. You have made my point about how well people in the same unit know one another, and therefore, you have made my point that your remarks don't apply to Phoenix's remark--as, i stress once again because the point hasn't seemed to sink in with you, she stipulated those whom she did not know.

0 Replies

Re: Morality- which is the better choice?

Cyracuz wrote:

What's your mettle? I asked this question in another thread, and Eorl suggested that it might be fun to have it in a thread of it's own. So here goes:

Imagine that 50 people you don't know personally are in mortal danger. If you do nothing they will die. You have a chance to save them, but to do that you must die yourself.
What do you do?

I'll come back in a while and tell you what I would do.

I have always believed in and supported selfishness.
That is Nature 's way.

For SURE, I 'd attend to my own business ( maybe call 911 )
and cram as much joy and beauty into my own life as I possibly can.
I will judge the success of my life by how much delight I have stuffed into it.
That is the right thing to do
David

P.S.:
Sometimes it can be fun
to give other folks a thrill, if it is not too inconvenient.

0 Replies

vikorr wrote:

My answer to this question is :
Only those who have been in the said situation would know their own answer.

Others can imagine, and try to visualise what they would do, but there is only one possible litmus test.

We can moralise on what is right and wrong, but it is meaningless once the test is faced,
except perhaps to enhance any feelings of guilt that the survivor/s may have.

I dispute and deny this.

I know, with absolute certainty,
that I 'd never consider committing suicide
to save 50, nor 50, 000 strangers.
I remain fully committed to enjoyment
of as much beauty and delight IN MY OWN LIFE, as I POSSIBLY can,
and I will remain fully immune to any " feelings of guilt ".

I encourage the same filosofy in everyone else.
David

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

I'll assuage your anxiety.

Spock - "The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few, or the one." Spock risked his life to save the ship because he reasoned it was an acceptable risk/reward given his responsibilities as second in command.

Kirk - "Sometimes the needs of the few outwiegh the needs of the many." Kirk risked the ship to save Spock's life because he believed his responsibilities as a friend merited the risk to the ship.

All better now?

No.

0 Replies

A bit of a tongue in cheek non sequitur in response to Cyracuz's post, you're welcome to expand on your declaration, it might be interesting.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

Foley wrote:
joefromchicago wrote:
Why would that be the right thing to do?

Because if I don't know any other variables in the situation, I simply have to look at the my 1 life versus their 50.

Why would their fifty lives be "worth" more than yours?

Who defines " worth " ??
The 50 ?
David

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

I'll assuage your anxiety.

Spock - "The needs of the many outwiegh the needs of the few, or the one."

I filosofically rejected that collectivism shoved into Spock 's mouth,
when first I heard it.

Quote:

Spock risked his life to save the ship because he reasoned
it was an acceptable risk/reward given his responsibilities as second in command.

THAT was significantly different,
in that Spock knew that the entire ship, INCLUDING HIMSELF,
wud be lost if he did not enter the lethally irradiated chamber
and take care of business.

Additionally, having voluntarily accepted his position
as a senior line officer, he assumed a special responsibility
toward the men ( and other species ) serving under his command.
David

0 Replies

Then he was resuected, but only at the risk of releasing the genesis machine, another soul stirring moral dilemma.

0 Replies

hmm, to choose yourself you must sacrafice their lives, to live you let them die.

if it was my actions that put them into danger i would save them.

if it was someone elses ( or even "the groups" own actions) i would let them die.

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

But the scenarion isn't to put oneself at risk. I've done such things; put myself at risk to help someone who were in worse trouble.

The scenario is to sacrifice one's own life to save others. That's different, because it is not the possibility of har, it is the certainty of death.

Your scenario is to sacrifice one's own life to save "strangers". So, in a word: no!

0 Replies

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho

Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave

The Void and the Absolute Oneness of the Universe - Discussion by Relinquish

can we reconcile darkness in man with madness(lunacy) ? - Question by studentnorway

Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas

Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus

Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus

In the GRAND scheme of things, what matters? - Question by komr98

Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King

How can something come from nothing? - Question by ripple

Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz

Forums
» Morality- which is the better choice?
» Page 3

Previous
1
2
3
4
Next

Read Discussion
Reply to All

Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 11/14/2024 at 05:28:08

▲ ▼