Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

[arrekusuof93]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

My first concern is my own survival and well-being. If I shoot the man and subsequently save 100 people, then I could still be imprisoned. It's not clear whether or not I would be killed by the resulting meltdown if I don't shoot him. If I won't be killed then the lives of 100 strangers are not worth my going to prison. This is all assuming the man is completely ignorant (thereby innocent) of what he is about to do. If a man was able to be proven guilty of intentionally trying to kill hundreds, then I would shoot him.

[Zageron]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

How would YOU feel if someone shot you because you were going to make a fatal mistake? Wouldn't you rather they, as other people have said, tranq you or beat you up?

[FuzenAkuma]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

oh. My answer was in reference to the first situation.

In the bomb situation, I would like this question answered. Why can I not just shoot the man wearing the bomb? He cannot kill the people if he is dead and unable to trigger the bomb. And what is to say that killing the innocent person will ACTUALLY stop him? He could very easily turn around and trigger the bomb anyways. Killing him would, in theory, eliminate that as a possibility.

I think we should assume in this case that the bomb is a time bomb that can ONLY be stopped by the man with it, and it has around 15 seconds remaining. Since it's a hypothetical situation, we should say that the ONLY way the bomb can be stopped will be for the man to say a secret code that ONLY he knows, and the ONLY way he will do it is if you shoot an innocent person. This way, if you kill the man with the bomb, the bomb will still go off, killing the 100 people.

Whether he goes against his word or not... I guess that's for you to decide, unless somethingillremember says he won't.

Anyway, with my above assumptions including the assumptions that he won't go back on his word and I can choose who to kill, I would simply kill the oldest -looking person I could find in the 10 seconds. Sure, it may be wrong to kill the elderly, but they've already lived their lives, while younger folk may have many more years to go.

[OrganisM]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

These situations that people come up with are typically so one dimensional there's no way to really argue them because the circumstances aren't a complete set and there's too much guesswork involved as to what happened/would happen.

[Tr44nc33]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

Thinking of the Overpopulation problem, i would let the 100 people die.

[rzr]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

How would YOU feel if someone shot you because you were going to make a fatal mistake? Wouldn't you rather they, as other people have said, tranq you or beat you up?

You wouldn't feel anything, lol. You'd be dead.

[Necros140606]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

after the universe will shrink none of this will make any sense. this situation would probably feel as an excuse to kill someone and try out what it feels like. also, the kill1 save100 is the general guideline for almost any government on earth. it's generally the best thing to do, even though i'd probably be more concerned about the value of the one dude against the 100 dudes. but any judgement is plain relative and subjective, hence why i would fall into nonsense.

[Temote]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

*SECOND EDIT*
Gah! I can't get people to understand this! Okay, lets change up the story. There is a crazy guy. You have a gun. Crazy guy (who you cannot kill at the moment) will kill 100 people (he has a bomb) unless you kill some innocent person within the next ten seconds. Got it?

Well, in this situation, I probably wouldn't bother. Someone who is 'crazy' is likely to still kill the 100 even if you kill the 1 innocent person, so there really isn't much point.

Also, I think it's hilarious that you have to keep trying to change your question because "We don't understand". Everyone understood the question perfectly well, but it was presented in a way that left multiple answers, not just the black and white answers you wanted.

[Svaz]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

If he's too negligent to utilize basic safety information for his job (if I know it, why doesn't he? how the hell did he get this job?), how innocent is he then? If he's sneaking his way into jobs better done by someone else (me), at the cost of other people's well being (a nuclear powerplant being destroyed will affect more than the 100 people it kills rofl, ohi fallout) I feel no pity for him. I'm sure I can find some things that were overlooked during his hire.

This post used the term 'ignorant' in reference to this fellow, and I agree with this assessment. He's too ignorant, in fact, to be considered a viable candidate for his job. I bet his house isn't even properly equipped to protect himself!

In short, I feel that a stupid person handling dangerous things is just as bad as someone with ill intent handling them.

In the second edit, I would absolve myself from the situation, or try to stop this criminal by other means; I'm the goddamn Batman.

[tinefico]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

So... the guy don't know that he will kill 100 persons. So if you kill him it's like killing for nothing. But, if you don't kill him, 100 persons will die.
Huh O.o

[clarinet89]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

Morally, I would want to kill the one guy to save the hundred. But realistically, I probably wouldn't get away with it, or I wouldn't end up killing him, or something else would go wrong. Even if I did it and got away with it, the idea of even taking someone's life is really not something that I would want to do and could probably never do it.

So no, I wouldn't kill him, because the chances of negative repercussions for me would be too great to take the risk.

[mead1]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

Perhaps the one is Rambo, he's manning a fighter jet, and he's about to drop a bomb on a nest of a hundred commies.

Why the **** would I shoot rambo to save a bunch of commies?

[Chaosvermin]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

Why the **** would I shoot Rambo to save a bunch of commies?

Communism isn't that bad...

[mead1]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

Communism is the deep-rooted evil that is destroying our way of life. Are you a communist? Hmmm?

[FishFishRevolution]

Re: Deep Philosophical Question #1: Would you kill him?

I refuse to abide any communists. Anyone suspected of having communist sympathies will be perma-banned immediately.