New topic
Printable| Author | Message |
Here is a fun hypothetical moral/ethical question for everyone: on utilitarianism Would you slaughter and eviscerate 1,000 children if it would eliminate all wars for the entire future of humankind?
As John Stuart Mill said: "Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." Would you say that sacrificing 1,000 innocent children to eliminate the suffering of billions was right? SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
if u have 2 kill another 4 peace, is there really justification? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DigitalLisa said: if u have 2 kill another 4 peace, is there really justification?
That is the question... Is the greater good served by killing 1,000 innocent people to save millions of lives in the future? ... [This message was edited Wed Dec 11 6:36:02 PST 2002 by IceNine] SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
:OMFG: god no! Ice cut it out!!! I don't even want to know who here would do that... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I myself am against war. War has never solved anythhing except 4 taking innocent lives. I think If there is differnce between two nations, they should find some other 2 reconcile their difference other then resulting 2 war. I mean not only do you take away innocent lives, but then the tax dollars goes sky. With all these war, pretty soon, you'll have spend $50 G's for a loaf of bread. If they're think homelessness is problem now, just wait until the furture ... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
No, absolutely not. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DigitalLisa said: I myself am against war. War has never solved anythhing except 4 taking innocent lives. I think If there is differnce between two nations, they should find some other 2 reconcile their difference other then resulting 2 war. I mean not only do you take away innocent lives, but then the tax dollars goes sky. With all these war, pretty soon, you'll have spend $50 G's for a loaf of bread. If they're think homelessness is problem now, just wait until the furture ...
Right... So, what if you could eliminate all future wars by killing the 1,000 children... would you do it? SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NO  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IceNine said: DigitalLisa said: I myself am against war. War has never solved anythhing except 4 taking innocent lives. I think If there is differnce between two nations, they should find some other 2 reconcile their difference other then resulting 2 war. I mean not only do you take away innocent lives, but then the tax dollars goes sky. With all these war, pretty soon, you'll have spend $50 G's for a loaf of bread. If they're think homelessness is problem now, just wait until the furture ...
Right... So, what if you could eliminate all future wars by killing the 1,000 children... would you do it? But, you're not taking into account the suffering that perhaps a million people would feel at the loss of those children. Are you getting at 'acceptable losses' during war? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ok maybe if 1000 sick people who are going to die anyway came forward and said they would sacrafice themselves then I'd do it. But I'd probably shoot myself after. I don't think I could live with myself... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
oh wait, we're talking about children...nevermind. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
applekisses said: IceNine said: DigitalLisa said: I myself am against war. War has never solved anythhing except 4 taking innocent lives. I think If there is differnce between two nations, they should find some other 2 reconcile their difference other then resulting 2 war. I mean not only do you take away innocent lives, but then the tax dollars goes sky. With all these war, pretty soon, you'll have spend $50 G's for a loaf of bread. If they're think homelessness is problem now, just wait until the furture ...
Right... So, what if you could eliminate all future wars by killing the 1,000 children... would you do it? But, you're not taking into account the suffering that perhaps a million people would feel at the loss of those children. Are you getting at 'acceptable losses' during war? I am taking that into account... let's say that a million people suffered from the loss of the children, but there were no deaths other than the 1,000 children... the future wars could be assured to kill people in the millions and cause the grieving of many, many millions more over time. Would the death of a thousand and the suffering of a million be a fair price to pay to eliminate the death of millions and the suffering of billions? SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
no...i like how this is supposed to be a "fun" question... 
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IceNine said: applekisses said: IceNine said: DigitalLisa said: I myself am against war. War has never solved anythhing except 4 taking innocent lives. I think If there is differnce between two nations, they should find some other 2 reconcile their difference other then resulting 2 war. I mean not only do you take away innocent lives, but then the tax dollars goes sky. With all these war, pretty soon, you'll have spend $50 G's for a loaf of bread. If they're think homelessness is problem now, just wait until the furture ...
Right... So, what if you could eliminate all future wars by killing the 1,000 children... would you do it? But, you're not taking into account the suffering that perhaps a million people would feel at the loss of those children. Are you getting at 'acceptable losses' during war? I am taking that into account... let's say that a million people suffered from the loss of the children, but there were no deaths other than the 1,000 children... the future wars could be assured to kill people in the millions and cause the grieving of many, many millions more over time. Would the death of a thousand and the suffering of a million be a fair price to pay to eliminate the death of millions and the suffering of billions? If it was guaranteed, yes, of course. But, it would have to be a fair lottery-type selection of people to be sacrificed. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Yes, of course, if it is guaranteed, u'd get a pretty good ROI. Roughly guessing, u'd b cashing in after what, 6 months? U'd b a fool not 2 do this. "It's better 2 B hated 4 what U R than 2 B loved 4 what U R not."
My IQ is 139, what's yours? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I would be ok with killing 1,000 children if it truly ended all later wars or prevented the deaths of people by war---but we don't live in a vaccuum--there is no way this would happen.
Even if it was somehow possible to do so, say for a hundred years, mankind would find a way to market 1,000 kids' deaths for no war. "Hey i heard if you killed a thousand kids, we get 100 yrs of deathless peace." "I heard it only came out to 99 years, you got ripped off. Now Sam over here can give you 102 yrs if you throw in a few barbaric medical tests..." And so on. As for war itself, i am not against all wars...but few are really a last option. The American Revolution, WWI, and WWII were justified wars. Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Iraq were not. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mrchristian said: I would be ok with killing 1,000 children if it truly ended all later wars or prevented the deaths of people by war---but we don't live in a vaccuum--there is no way this would happen.
Even if it was somehow possible to do so, say for a hundred years, mankind would find a way to market 1,000 kids' deaths for no war. "Hey i heard if you killed a thousand kids, we get 100 yrs of deathless peace." "I heard it only came out to 99 years, you got ripped off. Now Sam over here can give you 102 yrs if you throw in a few barbaric medical tests..." And so on. That's the beauty of hypothetical questions!  SUPERJOINT RITUAL - http://www.superjointritual.com
A Lethal Dose of American Hatred | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IceNine said: Would you slaughter and eviscerate 1,000 children if it would eliminate all wars for the entire future of humankind?
As John Stuart Mill said: "Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness." Would you say that sacrificing 1,000 innocent children to eliminate the suffering of billions was right? for sure man .. give me a thousand lil innocent babies make sure that they are the offspring of those fat cats and polticians .. bush n blair beware and i would have no problems solving this puzzle hey and if it ends global suffering 2 .. cool ... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
IceNine said: mrchristian said: I would be ok with killing 1,000 children if it truly ended all later wars or prevented the deaths of people by war---but we don't live in a vaccuum--there is no way this would happen.
Even if it was somehow possible to do so, say for a hundred years, mankind would find a way to market 1,000 kids' deaths for no war. "Hey i heard if you killed a thousand kids, we get 100 yrs of deathless peace." "I heard it only came out to 99 years, you got ripped off. Now Sam over here can give you 102 yrs if you throw in a few barbaric medical tests..." And so on. That's the beauty of hypothetical questions! War, justified or not, is a confrontation of sorts...a grievance, a discussion, an argument. I'd rather have people evolve to peace-- or kill eachother if we can't--than take a shortcut. If we truly aren't able to get along, without war we'll find other ways to drive eachother crazy. How does that song go..."I don't care what they say, i won't live in a world without love". Which poses our next question: Does war equal love? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The ends do not justify the means. Sorry, not gonna kill innocent individuals. Fear is the mind-killer. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I wouldn't do it...if for no other reason than mankind would simply find another way besides war to cause human suffering in the name of gaining and keeping power and wealth...eliminating war wouldn't eliminate that aspect within us which causes something like war in the first place... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
God no! Who is to say that doing this would eliminate anything...Mankind will still find a way, and reasons to fight one another...^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^
Being happy doesn't mean that everything is perfect, it means you've decided to look beyond the imperfections... unknown | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
This is the kind of shit that causes strife..killing just ONE anybody for anything for "the so called good" is the reason why all of this bs ghappens. In a perfect said society, or halfway decent, one does not take from another for the greater good of humanity etc. That is what taints the world, the purpose etc. Hot dang..this is akin to the Jesus story. Ice you sly devil you!
. [This message was edited Wed Dec 11 9:20:24 PST 2002 by rdhull] "Climb in my fur." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
teller said: The ends do not justify the means. Sorry, not gonna kill innocent individuals. Just wondering if you support any use of war at all?
War -which kills innocent people- is a means to an end. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
"The death of one person is a tragedy, make it a million and it becomes nothing more than a statistic"
Such thoughts are reseved for meglomaniacs, those who commit genocide or evil homocidal despots. The rest of normal society would refuse to kill anyone no matter what reward was on offer ----------------------------------------- | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
dewmass said: "The death of one person is a tragedy, make it a million and it becomes nothing more than a statistic"
Such thoughts are reseved for meglomaniacs, those who commit genocide or evil homocidal despots. The rest of normal society would refuse to kill anyone no matter what reward was on offer  "Climb in my fur." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the 1000  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Thecherryloon said: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the 1000
What Ice forgot to mention was that the 1000 children would come from the same town you grew up in within 5 years of your birthday [This message was edited Wed Dec 11 10:32:09 PST 2002 by DoMeBaby] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DoMeBaby said: Thecherryloon said: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the 1000
What Ice forgot to mention was that the 1000 children would come from the same town you grew up in within 5 years of your birthday
[This message was edited Wed Dec 11 10:32:09 PST 2002 by DoMeBaby] well that's alright.That town blew anyway and i been left nearly 15 years.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Thecherryloon said: DoMeBaby said: Thecherryloon said: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the 1000
What Ice forgot to mention was that the 1000 children would come from the same town you grew up in within 5 years of your birthday
[This message was edited Wed Dec 11 10:32:09 PST 2002 by DoMeBaby] well that's alright.That town blew anyway and i been left nearly 15 years. Glad you didn't take offense--just wanted to put my little twist on it  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |