The premis is to do three things. Choosing one person and pushimg the botton, as already stated , gives a 50/50 chance either way. Walk away the propability becomes 100%. It is a delima without an answer, other than to say the 50/50 chance is the best one could do, also the interjection of what if does not apply to the question. In my opinion most would walk away, not many care for 50/50 odds.
Which one of these men will you kill...if either?
by Terry 112 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Twitch
If wrong, only eleven lose but countless more would gain = this statement by me is in error as many more wouldn't gain anything by the scientist's death. Choosing to kill either by selection or inaction is not morally the same as possibly prolonging one's life (cancer patients). The question's parameters don't allow one to make a choice without bloodguilt. Therefore it's a matter of degree in number of deaths, those being one only (if the serial killer) or eleven (by inaction or killing the scientist). I stand by my original answer of pressing a button and taking the chance that only one would die, that being the killer. If the fourth choice of killing them both is an option, that's a tougher question as it then becomes a choice of a guaranteed two deaths only. Interesting question.
-
Berengaria
Still, the worst outcome is 11 dead and no cure for cancer. If you kill the scientist, that is still the outcome. It's definitely worth taking the chance.
-
crapola
If I had to choose then the serial killer would get it.
-
tec
Tec, none of your scenarios covers the number of people saved by the life of the scientist and his cure.
You're right. I am thinking of the task set directly in front of me... not the many different consequences that could come from it.
Tec, excuse me, I love you dearly, but you are making an excellent point. Religion has NO place in politics or government. If sitting by and waiting for god is your answer, you have no business applying for the job
Well, I 100% agree with that, and I have no intention of applying to work in the government. So no worries there :) (love back to you )
But if someone can just calculate the worth of a life down to odds and numbers, then I would say that they have no place in government either... although that is exactly what we have in government, I suppose.
I would also wager that of the people who have said they would kill both, or take a 50/50 chance, most of you would not push the button. It's one thing to be sure in theory, and quite another to be looking at the person you're about to kill, especially when one of those people is an innocent man, and then kill him.
I am also not convinced that any "greater good" has ever come from choosing the lesser of two evils. Not in the long run. Would it end with this one test? Would that person who pushed the button then go on to have a different outlook, an ease with taking life if he thinks it might save other lives?
I'm just not a person who thinks that a person should do a wrong, even if they think that means they're doing a greater good. That is one of the ways that corruption begins, imho.
Tammy
-
Farkel
Terry,
I would heed the words of Thomas Jefferson on this one. He said it was better to let a hundred guilty men go free than convict one innocent man.
The problem with your poser is the slippery slope it creates if such an option becomes available. The "kill them all and let God sort it out" plays hell on the innocent who are killed because some guilty ones might also be killed in the notion of keeping society safe.
Stalin killed about 20,000,000 of his Empire's citizens. I'm sure a small number of them deserved it, but that is small consolation for the tens of millions of them who didn't, not to mention their wives, children, parents, friends and the rest of their families.
Playing God with people's lives is best left in the hands of God and not humans.
Besides that, if the peaceful populace at large were allowed to keep and bear arms as they should be, that serial killer in your poser would stand a good chance at getting his commupance in short order.
Farkel
-
bobld
Push the buttom and hope you kill the bad dude if not at least you have the safisfaction of knowing the bad dude will not kill the good dude.Hope for a cure.
B
-
Terra Incognita
"It is a delima without an answer, other than to say the 50/50 chance is the best one could do, also the interjection of what if does not apply to the question. In my opinion most would walk away, not many care for 50/50 odds."
Folks; let's look at this from a different perspective. That of a cancer patient or someone related or befriended to one (quite a few people).
-
EntirelyPossible
This isn't really a thought experiement, per se, but what the fuck, I'll play along.
How do I know YOU aren't the serial killer and just hooked up the killing machines for your own sick pleasure? If you hooked them up, why are you asking me to push the button, do you lack the courage of your conviction? If you know one of them WILL kill 11 more people, you clearly have information from the future, why don't you use that power to tell me which one it is?
-
ziddina
Neither...
I'll let "Jehovah" turn both of them into bird food...
Besides, the scientist is doubly damned, since he probably believes in the evils of EVOLUTION!!! The murderer - hey, if he confesses to the elders, then he's forgiven!! And any subsequent murders will be covered up by the congregation - can't bring reproach upon "Jehovah's" name now, can we...???
Zid