Which one of these men will you kill...if either? (page 5)

ziddina

On second thought, I like "Entirely Possible's" scenario better...

Wasanelder Once

The answer is: Kill Terry so he can't bring up these damned questions any more!

"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?"

Yes; I would press that button. As for the innocent man you may possibly kill, that is the doctor who obviously wants to cure cancer, look at it from his perspective. If he were in that position, of having to make a decision to either kill himself or the serial murderer at the flip of a coin, what do you think he would decide? Remember, if his motives for the cancer cure are altruistic he will see it not as a 50/50 chance of his dying but of millions dying. Go ahead and assume he is religious or not religious (religious people do not have a monopoly on morality).

ziddina

^^^^^^^^ ROFL!!! LOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rats!!! Too slow with the "submit" button!!!

ROFL @ WasanElderOnce!!

tec

Terra, he might well choose to do that. Or even wish that someone would do it in his stead. Or he might not. But that would be his call to make, and not mine.

(I don't think religious people have any more claim to morality than anyone else, though)

Of course, in reality, Entirely Possible is Entirely Correct (in this oneparticular instance, EP... :P). Someone putting you in this position could obviously end the serial killer if they so chose. The fact that they have set up some sadistic test would mean I couldn't trust them, and I would definitely NOT play their game.

Tammy

Berengaria

LOL, I have been waiting for Terry to swoop in and say "Everything you believe is a LIE!"

EntirelyPossible

(in this oneparticular instance, EP... :P)

Strangely, it's always one particular instance, it just happens to be EVERY one ;)

Berengaria

Flash!! Ohhhhouuuuuouuuuuuuuu!

Terra Incognita

tec: "The fact that they have set up some sadistic test would mean I couldn't trust them, and I would definitely NOT play their game."

In a 'thought experiment', it is assumed that the situation is transparent and beyond doubt. So there is no mistrust of the person who's setting up the test, irrespective of his morality or amorality. In fact, these thought experiments often times represent an equivalent dilemma without an intermediary involved; just a set of circumstances where the situation is obvious beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Terry

Okay, folks, the reason I posed this experiment was not to obtain a CORRECT answer.

It is to expose each of you who responded to the MECHANISM of CHOICE inside of your own head.

Without examining HOW you make life or death decisions you may remain blind to your own personal value system.

This test requires you to be able to list your heirarchy of values from least to greatest.

Apart from that, it requires you to assume responsibility for changing the outcome in this world or abandoning responsibility and playing safe.

The personal Q&A (self-dialogue) to soften this choice is meaningless. The CHOICE/DECISION itself is all that counts.

In the final analysis, you are either an active DOER or a passive NON-DOER.

Each of us lives on a planet where things are always happening to affect everybody else's life.

Some of these happenings are evil.

All it takes for evil to flourish (as it does) is for good people to DO NOTHING.

Doing nothing when you have the knowledge and ability to change things, prevent things, improve things (always at some cost)

is still DOING SOMETHING which allows the evil process to continue.

Each of us is a gatekeeper.

Will we make the hard choices or sleep on the job?

Look at the condition of this world. How many gatekeepers are asleep on the job while the Evil goes wildly free?

How will we ever make a hard decision to stop an evil if the cost is AUTOMATICALLY too high in our mind?

"Let the other guy do it" is not a moral decision so much as it is a cop out.

People cry out for help and bystanders walk away.

Accidents along the roadside occur and the majority of the traffic zips on past eager for the comfort of home.

We have to ask ourselves tough questions and make hard choices to MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

I'm not advocating anything in regard to which button to push in our scenario.

I'm making a call for CLARIFICATION. I'm asking you to have the courage to make an active decision for a RIGHT reason

and not a fumbling, blind, "oh well" cop out.

Some day you may wish you'd done your homework!

There is a struggle to CHANGE the scenario for many of you. You seek to avoid confrontation with the problem and instead chip away at the forced nature of the situation. In a life or death moment of decision none of us has the choice of changing WHAT IS and making it a WHAT IF. We must already be trained and prepared. Are we?

Which one of these men will you kill...if either?

Share this