Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
One decides to leave the lever where it is and sacrifices four people for the sake of doing the right thing.
The physical action/non-action is nothing. Its your decision that matters morally.
How about a scenario I encounter a lot at work.If you didn't have to kill somebody...if it was just a matter of being in a position to save lives...
...of course you pull the lever.
The crux of the scenario in question is that there is no basis for deciding to take life to save life.
Which statement of mine are you asking about?On what basis?
It's fascinating how this is often viewed as killing one person instead of saving five.
There is a similar scenario where I'm visiting a foreign country run by a tyrant. The tyrant is about to execute 10 people as I am walking by and offers to free nine if I shoot one.
I can refuse and ten die. I can kill one and nine live. What causes me to hesitate? I don't want to commit murder. Essentially, I value my own righteousness more than nine lives. Or, I am unwilling to sacrifice my goodness for the sake of nine lives. Once it is framed that way, it appears I value my own righteousness more than the lives of others, which is selfish. On the other hand, to sacrifice one's own goodness for the sake of the many is a sacrifice worth considering. What matters more, my sense of being a good person or nine lives? Would I sacrifice nine lives to be good? That's such an odd thought.
Ok. Then step up because God intends for you to steer the plane.
I disagree when in situations where lives are at stake the only wrong decision is to not make a decision.
I am asking why you believe this? Why saving five lives is better than saving one?You arent killing any people. That burden lies with whoever caused the runaway trolley.
I'm saying its better to save more lives, all other things being equal.
Because I value lives. And I value reducing suffering. Most people do. We get together and call those things "better". If youre looking for an additional cosmic backstop to those values, ask one of the Christians.I am asking why you believe this? Why saving five lives is better than saving one?
Ah. The robot/zombie approach to every moral problem: dont need to think about it, I'm gonna follow Gods plan regardless.I don’t need to worry about that because if it is His plan for me to do it then I won’t have any choice in the matter.
Which statement of mine are you asking about?
Once you apprehend the options before you, you cannot un-apprehend them. At that point you will decide for one option or the other. There's no way out of that, unless youre a robot.That it's a sacrifice, that it's the right thing, and that it's your decision.
Once you apprehend the options before you, you cannot un-apprehend them. At that point you will decide for one option or the other. There's no way out of that, unless youre a robot.
For the Christian, its that you are made in the image of God, who is not a robot.On what basis are you not a robot?
For the Christian, its that you are made in the image of God, who is not a robot.
For me, its that it just seems like I'm not a robot. But a free will discussion could lead us far afield here. So I hesitate going down this road.
Ah. The robot/zombie approach to every moral problem: dont need to think about it, I'm gonna follow Gods plan regardless.
In that condition you dont even need to have moral beliefs. Just follow the script.
What value do you assign to one life?Because I value lives.
In that those 4 people pay with their lives for the sake of you leaving the scene with a "I didnt get involved" feeling. Maybe sacrifice isnt the right word for that.Fair enough.
On what basis is it a sacrifice?
I don't think doing nothing absolves one of culpability in this situation. If you see someone drowning, and you're an excellent swimmer and capable, you are obligated to get involved. Standing there saying, "I didn't cause this" doesn't help.
Since, given the scenario, you can do something you are already deciding five should die, instead of one. Whatever you do, you're culpable unless you think something like double-effect absolves you, which is a possible rejoinder no one seems to be appropriating.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?