The crux of any of the numerous outcomes resolves itself to your opening statement, that being "Let's Say". All hypothesis can be based upon "let's say" and as Chris points out there is not a scant bit of reality in living out the situation but only the "let's Say", which could be any number of variants. Who is Bill and who are "they" that would decide to kill Bill? What are the motivations? What are the ethical standards of the group in question?
On Feb 7, 4:31 pm, Pavan Kolachoor <[email protected]> wrote: > Lets say a group of people (political parties, the best of kingdoms, leaders > history has ever known..) instead of one person taking a moral decision to > sacrifice one guy and save many.. would they not decide to kill bill then ? > have we not come across this situation ? > > I am very new to these discussions.. so my knowledge is very limited.. > > > > On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Very good MB, institutionalized killing. > > > Soylent green anyone? > > > I concur and reiterate my earlier point; there is more to all these > > little case scenarios that you (pavan) present. > > > My only dilemma basically lies in the questionable aspect of "who are > > we saving" and will the people we save become the instruments of our > > own demise. > > > As you say, diverse hypotheticals bring about moral variations, > > societal and subjective. > > > On Feb 7, 2:30 am, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Different moral schemas are activated in different hypotheticals. > > > Extreme measures are appropriate in what feel like "extreme" > > > circumstances (kidnappers on an island; killer trolley), but not in > > > normal circumstances. The killing Bill hypothetical occurs in a > > > situation that is applicable every moment of every day. We can always > > > kill someone for his organs and save other people. But if that were > > > our everyday morality, there'd be a lot of institutionalized killing > > > of innocents. I think the point here is that "everyday" morality > > > differs from "extreme situation" morality. > > > > On Feb 7, 3:24 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Sorry, I missed the word " not." > > > > > The line must read : In your other instances, the likely victims do > > > > not have that. > > > > > On Feb 7, 11:21 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Does Bill have a voice in the decision, Pavan ? > > > > > > In your other instances, the likely victims do have that. > > > > > > On Feb 7, 9:25 am, Pavan Kolachoor <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > This is a famous philosophical question posted by > > > > > > BBC.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7739493.stm > > > > > > > I never got an opportunity to discuss this with anybody, your > > thoughts > > > > > > please. > > > > > > > *1. SHOULD WE KILL HEALTHY PEOPLE FOR THEIR ORGANS?* > > > > > > > Suppose Bill is a healthy man without family or loved ones. Would > > it be ok > > > > > > painlessly to kill him if his organs would save five people, one of > > whom > > > > > > needs a heart, another a kidney, and so on? If not, why not? > > > > > > > Consider another case: you and six others are kidnapped, and the > > kidnapper > > > > > > somehow persuades you that if you shoot dead one of the other > > hostages, he > > > > > > will set the remaining five free, whereas if you do not, he will > > shoot all > > > > > > six. (Either way, he'll release you.) > > > > > > > If in this case you should kill one to save five, why not in the > > previous, > > > > > > organs case? If in this case too you have qualms, consider yet > > another: > > > > > > you're in the cab of a runaway tram and see five people tied to the > > track > > > > > > ahead. You have the option of sending the tram on to the track > > forking off > > > > > > to the left, on which only one person is tied. Surely you should > > send the > > > > > > tram left, killing one to save five. > > > > > > > But then why not kill Bill? > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > Pavan- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > -- > Regards, > > Pavan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
