Immiment Death Question

[Vampire_Gurl]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Awesome Reply,dude!!! Dead Puppies???!!! Lol!!!

[devonin]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Critical thinking is for critical thinking, not nonsense and a horrific waste of punctuation. You're going to bring back the great question-mark shortage of 1997, and nobody wants that.

[Manmademusic]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Awesome Reply,dude!!! Dead Puppies???!!! Lol!!!

Careful, you might make the quadratic formula explode.

[Tank101]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Personally, I liked the superman comparison.

Let's say there's 100 people at the railroad tracks. They see the situation and are running around frantically trying to save them, thinking of what to do, looking for a solution but can't do anything. You see the lever. Nobody sees that you see the lever. The five people die. A year later you announce that you could have saved the lives of the five people to kill the other, but you didn't. Are the families (and other people that care) justified in hating you? Are you a murder?

As for what I'd do with the actual example, I still probably wouldn't do anything. I don't have the right to take a person's life just because I could cause less deaths, but that goes right back to the argument Kilroy is defending, so I'll stay out of this =)

[Lamoc]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Like I said earlier. Couldn't you be charged with second degree murder or something if you kill that one person.

[RPGFREAK]

Re: Immiment Death Question

I believe it's called 'Extenuating Circumstances'.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Extenuating circumstances are the reason there's three different degrees of murder. They aren't ever a reason to get off clean. A judge might issue a very low sentence though. They might also judge it not to be murder, but I'm not sure how honest or correct that decision would be. In a case like this though it would be perfectly plausible to argue temporary insanity, all the elements are there.

[Lamoc]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Well if you don't do anything, you're fine. If you pull the lever, YOU put that man in danger on purpose. Soooo..... I think that would be terms of murder.

[devonin]

Re: Immiment Death Question

I love how we've moved from trying to invent a third option seperate from the two presented to trying to place a thought experiment into modern realistic life, and base their decision on whether they'd be criminally charged.

If you really want to add in real life elements, assume instead that you work for the railway company, and your sole job is to man that lever, and if the train will hit something on one of the tracks, you're to use the lever to move them onto the second and empty track, but when you come back from your lunch break, you see the 5 people on the track that is active, and one person on a track that isn't.

You are now fully responsible for the decision to leave the lever alone or pull the lever, because its your job. You can no longer hide behind "If I do -nothing- I'm not responsible" because if you do nothing now you -are- responsible, and if you do something you're also responsible.

[Lamoc]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Well you shouldn't have left your post to begin with.

[devonin]

Re: Immiment Death Question

*sigh* quibble quibble quibble. True story, when I worked for the campus bookstore at my university, we had a book in called "Semantics" that was probably a good 900 pages, I laughed rather a lot.

A thought experiment, by definition, requires some degree of suspension of disbelief, and an acceptance that sometimes applying real-world addendums will ruin the experiment, so you just -don't do that- and take the premise of the experiment as it is stated.

There are thought experiments that involve demons, thought experiments that involve perfect glass spheres floating in space, while you are floating in the middle of them...They aren't supposed to be realistic, or you would just do a -normal- experiment.

The purpose of this thought experiment was to put a person in a position where they had to choose between saving one life or saving five lives, that's all. It was never intended that people would hem and haw over the logistics of whether it's their fault if they do nothing, or whether they'll be legally responsible for pulling the lever but not legally responsible for not pulling the lever.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Immiment Death Question

What a silly thought expiriment. I could answer questions while pretending to be a fascist or a marxist, but that wouldn't make the methods of thought I employed substantive or correct. By limiting your choice of answers to two incorrect responses what do you hope to prove? That a difference in semantic values can change the entire validity of a perspective? If so why object to adding third answers when the very act of choosing an answer not presented is an act of rejecting current semantic values?

[_demonhead_]

Re: Immiment Death Question

Situation:
A gigantic metal ball is in freefall in the sky, headed straight toward a party of 5 people who stand unprotected on a platform. When it lands on them in a few seconds, they will surely be crushed. On another platform, one person stands alone safely. You stand 100 feet away from each platform with no equipment. A lever is at your side. If you pull it, the two platforms will instantaneously switch positions, putting the previously safe person in grave danger and freeing the five people from any danger. You do not know the identities of the people. They could be strangers, friends, celebrities, family, enemies, etc, but you do not know.

Question:
Would you pull this lever?

Why/why not?

I may pull the lever...depends what I think of the people on each platform, and the mood I'm in at the time.

If there were 5 sheep on one platform and one on the other I would probably pull it, but humans are different to sheep.They each have their own unique qualitys..on the platform with 5 people I might look at them and see 5 scumbags, on the other a guy in a suit..do I sacrifice this honest looking guy for 5 people that look like they deserve to die.

Sure you can say that race and looks don't come into it..but it does...you can't really use people in an example like this..since there is so many different kinds...so use sheep, they all look the same but humans are each unique...in their own little way...

*Sacrifice 1 honest looking guy to save 5 greasy looking gangsters*
*Sacrifice 1 greasy looking gangster to save 5 honest looking guys*
*Sacrifice 1 white guy to save 5 black guys*
Blah...etc...

[Manmademusic]

Re: Immiment Death Question

I may pull the lever...depends what I think of the people on each platform, and the mood I'm in at the time.

We've got a mass murderer in the house.

If there were 5 sheep on one platform and one on the other I would probably pull it, but humans are different to sheep

Some people would try to sue you for animal cruelty, and if they were owned by anyone, they could sue you straight off.

on the platform with 5 people I might look at them and see 5 scumbags, on the other a guy in a suit

Don't judge a book by it's cover.

Sure you can say that race and looks don't come into it..but it does...

Can anyone else say they honestly agree with this?

[_demonhead_]

Re: Immiment Death Question

We've got a mass murderer in the house.

thanks...

Some people would try to sue you for animal cruelty, and if they were owned by anyone, they could sue you straight off.

Sure..they probably could, but I wouldn't really be thinking about that at the time. I would just see 5 sheep on one platform and 1 on the other -.-..also sheep are less intelligent than humans...blah..either way sheep all look alike..so saving 5 and sacrificing one...too complicated now.. 5>1 sheep = all same

Don't judge a book by it's cover.

A cover is used to show what the book is about..if the cover has nothing to do with the book it shouldn't even have a cover...but anyway..a human isn't a book, whats on the outside is some reflection of whats on the inside

...