Death Part Deux

Sinque

Sinque

Sinque

Soldato
Joined
5 Aug 2004
Posts
7,386
Location
North East England
How many people would you kill to save your own life? And how hard would killing somebody be for you?

Personally I would do as many as it takes. If you don't save your own life then you wouldn't be able to feel the satisfaction you just saved x amount of people.

Killing someone I doubt I would struggle as long as they deserved it. Maybe knowing they deserved it might help clear my mind.
 
I reckon I would think too much about the consequences, but I reckon depending on the situation i.e my life or his I could.
 
A different take on this... the trolley problem.

The problem is this:
A trolley is running out of control down a track. In its path are 5 people who have been tied to the track by a mad philosopher. 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?

Next, consider this...

As before, 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?

Finally, in light of your answers to the previous dilemmas, how would you answer this...

A brilliant transplant surgeon has five patients, each in need of a different organ, each of whom will die without that organ. Unfortunately, there are no organs available to perform any of these five transplant operations. A healthy young traveler, just passing through the city the doctor works in, comes in for a routine checkup. In the course of doing the checkup, the doctor discovers that his organs are compatible with all five of his dying patients. Suppose further that if the young man were to disappear, no-one would suspect the doctor.

Did your answers change between the scenarios?
 
No - wouldn't flip the switch or shove the fat man. Both are equivalent imo - both have the intended consequence of killing one person to save the others, and in both cases that one has a right not to be sacrificed.
 
What ever it took really.

If anything is trying to kill me its going to die, simple instincts really :p
 
GarethDW said:
A different take on this... the trolley problem.

The problem is this:
A trolley is running out of control down a track. In its path are 5 people who have been tied to the track by a mad philosopher. 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?

Next, consider this...
As before, 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?

Finally, in light of your answers to the previous dilemmas, how would you answer this...

A brilliant transplant surgeon has five patients, each in need of a different organ, each of whom will die without that organ. Unfortunately, there are no organs available to perform any of these five transplant operations. A healthy young traveler, just passing through the city the doctor works in, comes in for a routine checkup. In the course of doing the checkup, the doctor discovers that his organs are compatible with all five of his dying patients. Suppose further that if the young man were to disappear, no-one would suspect the doctor.

Did your answers change between the scenarios?
Click to expand...

same questions i got in philosophy two years ago. yes, no, no. (imo)

1. needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, if there is only one alternative to five dying, and there is no other solution, then the one must die (however thinking consequentially; what if that one man/woman were to develop a cure for cancer, and the 5 be school drop outs and hungry hungry benefit hippos).

2. no, fat man has a right to live, why not consider throwing yourself infront of it? how fat is the fat man? if hes not much bigger than you wouldn't you do in a pinch? if he is a right 40 stone lard arse could you move him? but also, the most overriding factor in this is that you have no right to end someones life.

3. no again, whilst the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few the single man has the right to live his life, and yes, whilst the others do also, no one has the right to kill someone else.

it's all in my opinion, and based on beliefs. possible the best solution in every case is to do nothing, you are then absolved of responsibility.

in answer to the OP; situation dependant, but yes, i think provided proper justification i could do it, but i would never be able to live with it, would be a bit like a catch 22
 
Jacobson again asks a difficult question:

"What happens if, on one of the trolley tracks, the President of the United States has been tied by terrorists, and on the other trolley tracks, five average citizens are also tied up. As in the original Trolley Problem, who should you save?"
Click to expand...

...i see no problem :p
 
To be honest, I would not sacrifice any of the 'single people' to save the 'multiple people' in any of the scenarios above as I would have little motivation to do so.

But put my wife or children in danger and I can't think of a limit as to what I would do to save them - and yes that includes myself.
 
As many as necessary.
It wouldn't bother me.

With the trolley thing I would just let it run, nothing to do with me.
 
I think killing to save my life would be relatively easy however dependant on the circumstances - fighting for my life one on one or against several people then thas a no brainer but say youve be kidnapped along with a group of others........youve spent the last 6weeks with them and got to know them well, your captors then turn to you and say "choose one and kill them and your free" well thats a whole different story. I think actually fighting someone who is intent on killing you then not many people would hesitate to strike the fatal blow but its not always as simple i guess.
 
The only time I can see myself killing someone is if they are either trying to kill me or trying to kill my family and even then I think I would find it pretty hard to deal with. Maybe that's not the sort of scenario you were thinking of in your first post though?
 
I didn't really give a specific scenario. But as I said, I'd kill as many as needed - adult or child. There are plenty more out there and I'm selfish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom