Re: Immiment Death Question
someone could be a complete slob(hygiene) and still be a good person.
someone could be a complete slob(hygiene) and still be a good person.
-
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
Didn't we already go over this like, several pages ago? The whole point of the thought experiment was that guys like Mill said "Actually you -can- simply be made to choose between these two options, and I have a method by which you can make that choice that is both correct and morally correct" and the people who put forward this thought experiment did so to say, functionally "Bull**** you can, your system is idiotic"Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
Right. I just don't understand why you object to people trying to come up with a third option when doing that entails the rejection of the system you're describing and which you believe should be rejected.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
I'm not really objecting to people trying to come up with a third option, its because most of them seem to be doing like they are coming up with a way to cheat the question to allow for a favourable outcome, instead of drawing the conclusion the people posing it were looking for, namely that you reject the question as inherently flawed in the first place.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
Maybe since it switches so fast the inertia would send all of the people flying out of harms way :PComment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
lol, They switch places(Like warping), not swing around to opposite positions.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
hahaha i see i see.
I guess my answer (real one not the BS version :P) isnt as philisophical as previous posts, but i think that its more of a cause and effect thing and choosing the more practical one.
So switching the 5 people and the one person so that the group is in danger would place the single person in the position of a certain degree of gratitude but wracking guilt that he/she was saved in the place of many, causing him/her to question her own self worth. Plus if this person was used as a witness for the deaths, it may seem like you were being selfish, as you had the option to save more people but chose to save that one person, regardless of whether or not you knew that person.
Yet saving the group would place all of them in the state of gratitude, and they would feel that your decision was justified since it was saving one person vs five, thus their guilt would not be as great as that of that single person.
Therefore it would be better to pull the lever and save the group, as it would save the single person from any self doubt, benefit a larger group of people, and keep yourself from the position of blame.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
i still say pulling the lever is wrongComment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
I don't know how I should react to knowing that there are people in the world who think "Even if I have the power to change things, if I just stand there and watch, I'm totally blameless"
I do not want you to be anywhere near a burning building that has people I care about in it.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
True true.
And while being blameless, you'd still feel the guilt, since you were there to witness the five people about to be crushed. And maybe you wouldn't be entirely blameless. Suppose there was someone around to witness the situation you were in and they see that you chose not to act.
"The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality."
-- DanteComment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
Ignorance is bliss.
[url=http://www.narutoflow.com/character-quiz/]Take the Naruto Character
for brawlers: 2836-1905-4019
I don't know how well it'll work, but give me a add
, or pm me so i can add you.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
Yes i totally agree, however in this situation you are not ignorant, since you are watching several people that are in danger and you are aware that they are in danger. Therefore in this situation, the lack of action would be more like apathy.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
I think if this situation came up for me, I'd flip the lever. It's essentially a question of whether I want 5 people haunting my conscience, or just one. If I didn't flip the switch, I'd still feel personally responsible for their death, knowing that I COULD HAVE done something to save them.
This is, of course, assuming that all of them are strangers. If I had one of my few friends on that platform, I'm taking actions accordingly to make sure they live.Originally posted by Samuel Butler
BRAWL FRIEND CODE: 4639-8622-1756
PM with your code for add.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
I don't know how to react to people who think "Even if I have no business judging people as if they're goods to be weighed, 5 is still greater than 1. I'm willing to personally kill one person I have no business with in order to prevent the deaths of 5 people I also have no business with."
A burning building doesn't present the dilemma that has been the focal point of this thread. I don't have to kill anyone in order to save people from a burning building. I might have to make tough decisions about who to save, but it's not the same as choosing to set fire to a building with 10 people in it in order to somehow prevent a building with 50 people in it from burning, which would be the burning building equivalent of this question.Comment
-
Re: Immiment Death Question
Well, to me, just standing there and watching the 5 people get run over by the train is exactly the same from a responsability standpoint, as if the train were moving towards the 1 person and you pulled the lever to make to point towards the 5. We obviously disagree on that, and since it's a pretty central point to both of our arguments, I don't really expect synthesis to occur.Comment
Comment