A question of Morality...

Tefal · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:33

Burnsy2023 said:
Well morally the answer is simple, like has been said "the needs of the many and all", but making the right decision at the time is a difficult thing. Either way, I'd be ****ed up afterwards.

that doesn't really answer the question though does it?

asim18 · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:34

lowrider007 said:
So hypothetically speaking if you was in this situation you would do nothing becuase you would be busy wondering who they were ?

How long does it take you to recognise your friends? Unless you're retarded or something?

stinamoo · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:35

*deleted*

Dj_Jestar · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:36

Burnsy2023 said:
An five that you'd still be responsible for killing if you stayed out of it.

No, I'd have no responsibility at all. This is not iRobot, and I am not a Robot with the second rule.

Burnsy2023 · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:41

Dj_Jestar said:
No, I'd have no responsibility at all. This is not iRobot, and I am not a Robot with the second rule.

Many people would disagree, whether it is through action or inaction, it is still a morally significant choice.

Have a read of this: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-responsibility/

Burnsy2023 · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:44

Tefal said:
that doesn't really answer the question though does it?

I don't think I could answer it. The choice would be made under extreme psychological pressure in a split second. I couldn't say what I'd do. I'd like to think I made the moral choice, but it's by no means guaranteed.

vincent1989 · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:45

what if the one person were to go on and cure cancer, whilst the 5 were just lay about wasters who happened to be on the track drinking white lighting, throwing stones at passing trains and shouting obscenities at small animals?

and no in both cases, by electing someone to die you are actively ending their life without consent and besides, i can't see there are people in the tunnel, it's to bloody dark!

Dj_Jestar · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:46

Burnsy2023 said:
Many people would disagree, whether it is through action or inaction, it is still a morally significant choice.

Have a read of this: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-responsibility/

No, it is an exception because there is no obligation to save some by causing harm to other. None at all.

Burnsy2023 · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:47

Dj_Jestar said:
No, it is an exception because there is no obligation to save some by causing harm to other.

Again that is debatable.

There is a responsibility to do the morally right thing, and that could be argued to be the immoral action towards a moral end.

Things change I've changed · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:47

asim18 said:
How long does it take you to recognise your friends? Unless you're retarded or something?

Excuse me ? :confused:

SourChipmunk · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:52

Burnsy2023 said:
I'd like to think I'd sacrifice myself, but you could never know without being in the situation.

"I cannot self-terminate."

I don't know who these knuckle-heads are or what they did to deserve being tied to the track. For all I know there's a mob boss overlooking all this who will give me a far more painful death for getting in the way.

My reaction: look around for security cameras, then haul butt outta there.

asim18 · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:57

lowrider007 said:
Excuse me ?

There's nothing confusing about what I said. Unless.....

Dj_Jestar · 23 Feb 2009 at 17:59

Burnsy2023 said:
Again that is debatable.

There is a responsibility to do the morally right thing, and that could be argued to be the immoral action towards a moral end.

"Means to an end" is far from moral, almost mutually agreed so.

Things change I've changed · 23 Feb 2009 at 18:01

asim18 said:
There's nothing confusing about what I said. Unless.....

Have I wronged you or something becuase I really don't understand

.

Surfer · 23 Feb 2009 at 18:05

lowrider007 said:
Radiolab - Morality

Fantastic show Radiolab, this one in particular delving into the question of 'Morality' I found very interesting indeed, if you find this kind of topic interesting I really recommend you give the show a listen.

At the beginning of the show they pose these two interesting questions below and use it as a lead into trying to understand where morality comes from.

Q1) A trolley is running out of control down a track. In its path are 5 people who have been tied to the track. Fortunately, you can flip a switch, which will lead the trolley down a different track to safety. Unfortunately, there is a single person tied to that track. Should you flip the switch?

Q2) A trolley is hurtling down a track towards five people. You are on a bridge under which it will pass, and you can stop it by dropping a heavy weight in front of it. As it happens, there is a very fat man next to you - your only way to stop the trolley is to push him over the bridge and onto the track, killing him to save five. Should you proceed?

No

&

No

not sure whether i would call these genuinely moralistic questions as they are very very contrived, artifical situations. (yes i know they are often used) Useful for theoretical discussion but i tend to think a person, an individual is more than what we label them in e.g. utilitarian.

SourChipmunk · 23 Feb 2009 at 18:12

I still think those five people were tied to the track for a reason, and if I flip the switch and the mob boss's son on the other track gets run over, I'm in for one painful encounter. I don't want my teeth put on a curb and have my head stepped on, or have my head squeezed in a vice until my eyeballs pop out, or even get a hole drilled through my kneecap. It just doesn't suit me.

Dj_Jestar · 23 Feb 2009 at 18:24

Ha, whilst it is amusing to pick apart the story.. I think it's safe to assume that it is summarised thusly:

Either you kill this one person, or five other persons will die. WWJD?

asim18 · 23 Feb 2009 at 18:35

lowrider007 said:
So hypothetically speaking if you was in this situation you would do nothing becuase you would be busy wondering who they were ?

asim18 said:
How long does it take you to recognise your friends? Unless you're retarded or something?

lowrider007 said:
Excuse me ?

asim18 said:
There's nothing confusing about what I said. Unless.....

lowrider007 said:
Have I wronged you or something becuase I really don't understand .

You said I would do nothing because I'd just be there wondering who they were.

I Implied that I can recognise my friends in a split second, even from the back of their head and the clothes they're wearing.

Dj_Jestar · 23 Feb 2009 at 18:36

So how about if they are all in body bags, but you know they are alive because they are wriggling?

Rich_L · 23 Feb 2009 at 18:37

The fat man one is easy, tell him the dilemma, then wander off and let him decide.

Delegation of responsibility for the maximum win