Ethical question on who to save

You can only save ONE of the following, which do you save?

  • An acquaintance that you are on average terms with

    Votes: 2 11.1%

  • 10 people from your neighborhood (none you know closely)

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • 100 people from your city (none from your neighborhood)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 1,000 people from your state (none from your city)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 10,000 people from your country (none from your state)

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • 1 million people in the world (none from your country)

    Votes: 14 77.8%
  • Total voters
    18
According to consequentialism you should save the million because it's good to save as many lives as possible.

Accord to deontologicalism you should stay silent of them because to make the choice to kill any of them is morally wrong.
 
If my dad killed a million innocent women and children to save me, I would commit suicide. It would not be no favor. You guys are looking at things from the wrong point of view. Let's make no mistake, it would be nothing other than the most selfish act in history.
 
Epicurus said:
We just have different points of view.
Click to expand...

Yes. You have a selfish point of view, rather than the point of view of those you are killing or those you are saving. Making a decision to kill someone, even if it saves someone else, is itself an immoral decision. I don't think we should always hold to the technically moral way, but it's just a fact.
 
How do you determine what is moral? Is it what tradition and society say are the standards of behavior? Is it what feels right to you personally? Do you apply a universal rule to every situation to determine which action would be the "moral" one?
 
Epicurus said:
How do you determine what is moral? Is it what tradition and society say are the standards of behavior? Is it what feels right to you personally? Do you apply a universal rule to every situation to determine which action would be the "moral" one?
Click to expand...

If we want to get all nihilistic about it then morality is artificial and doesn't exist as some sort of universal law, but something that our nature produces to cope with our integration into societies.
 
I voted for the 1 million. I figured, saving people from my state would not serve my ultimate lifetime goal of reducing traffic by any means necessary. Saving people in my city and/or state would eventually mean that one of the fuckers, with my luck, would be doing 60 in left lane when I need to get to my destination. So not worth saving their life.
Then I figured that some of the 10k that I'd save in my country would eventually make their way to my densely trafficked state. Which, with my luck, would end up keeping about 9,999 on the Jersey roads.
I chose the million because they were the least likely to cause me traffic problems.
 
Watermark said:
If we want to get all nihilistic about it then morality is artificial and doesn't exist as some sort of universal law, but something that our nature produces to cope with our integration into societies.
Click to expand...

That's kind of my point. One needn't even get all Nihilistic. Morality is artificial. It is the result of a societal conditioning and nothing more.
 
Epicurus said:
That's kind of my point. One needn't even get all Nihilistic. Morality is artificial. It is the result of a societal conditioning and nothing more.
Click to expand...

It is a result of our nature, which is partly natural and genetic and partly conditioned by society. There are many universals, and just as many moralities specific to a certain culture. It is quite evident though, that they can be created on the fly.
 
Watermark said:
It is a result of our nature, which is partly natural and genetic and partly conditioned by society. There are many universals, and just as many moralities specific to a certain culture. It is quite evident though, that they can be created on the fly.
Click to expand...

I fucking hate emo's.
 
Watermark said:
It is a result of our nature, which is partly natural and genetic and partly conditioned by society. There are many universals, and just as many moralities specific to a certain culture. It is quite evident though, that they can be created on the fly.
Click to expand...

So what gives any of it any meaning? If particular actions are varyingly considered "moral" by different societies at different times what is truly moral?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top