Which one would you kill?

[Avatar]

Anyways, my objection still stands: If you don´t value human life per se higher than the life of another animal, that doesn´t mean you value it lower than someone who does. E.g. someone might value the life of every animal sacred.

Uh, yeah, it does. Someone who would roll a dice to decide whether to save a human or mouse, obviously holds little regard for human life. How about a housefly? House is on fire and the guy rushes in, steps over the child, gets the housefly on the window and takes it out to safety.

But he doesn't value human life lower than me. Okaaaay then.

 

[quatona]

Uh, yeah, it does. Someone who would roll a dice to decide whether to save a human or mouse, obviously holds little regard for human life. How about a housefly? House is on fire and the guy rushes in, steps over the child, gets the housefly on the window and takes it out to safety.

But he doesn't value human life lower than me. Okaaaay then.

I´m glad you agree with my point that it all depends on situations (like the one you picture here, for example).

 

[Nihilismus]

"Humans are intrinsically more valuable than chimpanzees."

"Why?"

"Because humans have souls and chimpanzees do not."

"Why?"

"Because...the Bible..."

"Huh?"

"ZOMG YOU'D KILL BABIES TO SAVE INSECTS!!!1"

"..."

 

[Avatar]

"Humans are intrinsically more valuable than chimpanzees."

"Why?"

"Because humans have souls and chimpanzees do not."

"Why?"

"Because...the Bible..."

"Huh?"

"ZOMG YOU'D KILL BABIES TO SAVE INSECTS!!!1"

"..."

Your zinger at the end seems to be aimed at me with the insect reference. However, if you look back, you'll see I mentioned souls and the Bible not even once.

Guess you didn't read the thread before excreting in it.

 

[Wyzaard]

You have to kill either:
A. A severely retarded person - not so retarded that he/she is a vegetable. Just retarded.

B. A gifted chimp.

Which would you kill, and why?

Neither, because:

Additional info: There is no reason for this killing, other than you have to choose one...

I need ample, sufficient reasons to do such things; mission unacceptable.

Even if I were to bite, matters of self-awareness, quality of life, and other considerations, etc would need to be provided.

 

[Nihilismus]

Your zinger at the end seems to be aimed at me with the insect reference. However, if you look back, you'll see I mentioned souls and the Bible not even once.

Guess you didn't read the thread before excreting in it.

I've been with this thread since it started (you'd have noticed had you read it). That post was a summary.

 

[Wyzaard]

It doesn't mean that I value animals less than she does. It means I value humans more than she does.

On what grounds? Are there circumstances/conditions that might overlap human and animal value-domains?

To alter your scenario a bit:

A trolley is out of control, heading towards either or two targets that are on respective tracks that you switch the car onto... so you must choose which one will be hit:

A. A sane but unrepentant mass murderer with a penchant for children.

B. A pack of top-notch emergency-rescue dogs.

Methinks you might have some overlap.

(this is just one of all sorts of possibles... come up with more, people!)

 

[Caitlin.ann]

On what grounds? Are there circumstances/conditions that might overlap human and animal value-domains?

To alter your scenario a bit:

A trolley is out of control, heading towards either or two targets that are on respective tracks that you switch the car onto... so you must choose which one will be hit:

A. A sane but unrepentant mass murderer with a penchant for children.

B. A pack of top-notch emergency-rescue dogs.

Methinks you might have some overlap.

(this is just one of all sorts of possibles... come up with more, people!)

I would save the doggies.

 

[Avatar]

I've been with this thread since it started (you'd have noticed had you read it). That post was a summary.

A summary of what? An argument I didn't make?

Do you work for Fox News?

 

[Nihilismus]

A summary of what? An argument I didn't make?

Do you work for Fox News?

It's a summary of the thread.

Your analogy remains a non sequitur.

 

[Avatar]

I would save the doggies.

I'm with the doggies too.

 

[Avatar]

It's a summary of the thread.

Your analogy remains a non sequitur.

You cannot combine disparate posts by different posters with different positions into a single summary. In so doing you attribute arguments not made by certain posters to conclusions theorized by other posters. It's intellectual dishonesty. It is what is known as a strawman.

And do you know what non-sequitor means?

Animal life = human life therefore insect life = human life is not a non-sequitor. It is deductive reasoning.

You're out of your depth, go back to the teen forum.

 

[Nihilismus]

You cannot combine disparate posts by different posters into a single summary. In so doing you attribute arguments not made by certain posters to conclusions theorized by other posters. It's intellectual dishonesty. It is what is known as a strawman.

And do you know what non-sequitor means?

Animal life = human life therefore insect life = human life is not a non-sequitor.

You're out of your depth, go back to the teen forum.

Your fallacious analogy of the house fly is the actual straw man here. That was my point. You misrepresent the position of the relativist and make appeals to emotion. This thread has developed into the e-manifestation of the retard mentioned in the OP. Kindly do not derail it any further.

Your posts in this thread consist solely of lame attempts at humour and now you are telling me I am out of my depth? The gall of you, sah!

 

[Avatar]

Your fallacious analogy of the house fly is the actual straw man here. That was my point.

Calling a housefly an animal is an analogy?

We've already determined you don't know what a non-sequitor is, now I'm forced to ask if you know what an analogy is.

Or is that you don't know what an animal is?

 

[Wyzaard]

Back on track! Come up with some more trolley examples, people!

 

[WatersMoon110]

Back on track! Come up with some more trolley examples, people!

Okay, say you saw a trolley filled with explosives - if you did nothing it would kill a pile of human babies on the track. If you ran into it with your car, it would be thrown into a pet store filled with adorable bunnies and singing parakeets - exploding and killing both you and them.

What do you do? *wink*

 

[Caitlin.ann]

Bye bye babies.

 

[ttreg]

I would save the chimp.

 

[sidhe]

Okay, say you saw a trolley filled with explosives - if you did nothing it would kill a pile of human babies on the track. If you ran into it with your car, it would be thrown into a pet store filled with adorable bunnies and singing parakeets - exploding and killing both you and them.

What do you do? *wink*

Jump from my car, grab a few babies from the track (better a few should live than all shall die), let the trolley hit the rest, and take the remains to Avatar's basement.

Problem solved.

 

[YeshuaDisciple4]

You have to kill either:
A. A severely retarded person - not so retarded that he/she is a vegetable. Just retarded.

B. A gifted chimp.

Which would you kill, and why?

Additional info: There is no reason for this killing, other than you have to choose one, should you accept this mission. If you do not accept, this thread will self-destruct.

I would kill neither.