On 24/07/2006, at 9:19 AM, jdiebremse wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anyhow, if one changes the example such that on the second floor
are
150 Senior Citizens, I suspect that most people save the infants
first. Of course, I doubt that you would then be reaching the
conclusions that Senior Citizens don't have the "right to live"
or
that Senior Citizens aren't equal, and that killing a citizen
isn't
murder.
Nice sidestep, and nice way to avoid the answer.
It is an answer. Either you answer "yes you would still rescue the
infants", and thus your whole set of subsequent arguments are now
invalid, or you answer "I would be indifferent to saving the two" or
else "I would save the Senior Citizens", in which case we would have
a different discussion on our hands.
No, the arguments are still valid. We make the same choice for
different reasons.
Based on my presumption that you would still choose the infants in
my example, I have provided my answer, but demonstrated that my
answer doesn't demonstrate what you think it does.
You've not said why.
Charlie
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
