Originally posted by Jay Peatea
True but sometimes the fish is too big and pulls the rod in😉

Take one of his kidneys, I would decide who should live by judging there background/general character.

Kill the prisoner, I would expect them to kill me.

Assaniate the dictator, or if this is not possable attack.

Originally posted by Jay Peatea
Because killing an innocent person is wrong. However if the patients were kylie & J -lo & the bystander happened to be Hilter I'd say you'd have a case.

Hmm I wonder if the prisoners on death row carry donor cards ?

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
Consider the following three scenarios:

In all three scenarios, you are, figuratively speaking, attempting to make a desirable omelette but only by undesirably breaking some eggs. Lives are always spared by performing an act that, directly or indirectly, results in a smaller number of people dying than would otherwise have been the case; yet, our moral intuitions about which scenarios depict moral actions differ--at least mine do. I think (I) is wrong, and (II) and (III) are debatable. However, I cannot put my finger on why I have these different reactions. Why should the needs of the many not always outweigh the needs of the few?

Aiden




Good post Aiden. I believe you simply have a conscience that rules your actions. You do not require reason and proof to tell you what is wrong, just call it a 'gut feel'. That you feel b and c to be wrong ,yet can't explain why is just your conscience telling you what is right/wrong.

cheers

Originally posted by pcaspian

[/b]

Good post Aiden. I believe you simply have a conscience that rules your actions. You do not require reason and proof to tell you what is wrong, just call it a 'gut feel'. That you feel b and c to be wrong ,yet can't explain why is just your conscience telling you what is right/wrong.

cheers
[/b]

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
Hi pcaspian,

Maybe your gut instincts are noble, but what about Bin Laden's?

A right-winger thinks in good conscience its better to depose Saddam at the cost of a few thousand lives, but a left-winger, in good conscience, doesn't. Both feel their stance is right "in their gut" but both can't be right. Hence, a gut feeling of rectitude does not a right action make. Don't you think?

Aiden

Not really. I believe when you have to convince yourself that something isn't wrong by 'reason' when your gut feel tells you it is wrong, that indicates that you are merely trying to suppress your actuall belief system.

eg: Osama, you will kill 3 000 innocents from all over the world by flying a Jet into the WTC. What do you think his 'gut' feel would be before he thinks of valid reasons why indeed it is right to do so.

I don't see why a left winger could not also believe that it is indeed right to kill Saddam at the cost of killing his soldiers. I think we all have a gut feel and murder is wrong based on that. You have to consciously reason inorder to convince yourself that committing a wrong deed is indeed right based on the possible outcome.

But ofcourse when you 'override' your gut feel often enough, it will no longer come into play. EG: If you are a mercenary and you kill other soldiers, eventually your gut feel will not be a factor anymore. But it takes many attempts to override this feeling.

cheers