Total Posts:17|Showing Posts:1-17
Jump to topic:

Conjoined Twins.

bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2013 11:28:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:28:03 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
What the f*ck is wrong with you dude. I hate these dilemmas

Sorry?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2013 11:31:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Not if Mark consents to Tom separating.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2013 11:31:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

It all depends, does Mark consent to the separation?
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2013 11:31:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:31:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

It all depends, does Mark consent to the separation?

Oh, I forgot to add that part.
No, Mark does not consent.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2013 11:32:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:31:05 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Not if Mark consents to Tom separating.

Crap dude, you just had to post 17 seconds before me haha
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2013 11:32:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:31:57 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

It all depends, does Mark consent to the separation?

Oh, I forgot to add that part.
No, Mark does not consent.

Then yes it would be immoral.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 12:05:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:32:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:57 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

It all depends, does Mark consent to the separation?

Oh, I forgot to add that part.
No, Mark does not consent.

Then yes it would be immoral.

And forcing Tom to stay joined (and thereby die) is moral?
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 12:33:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 12:05:20 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:32:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:57 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

It all depends, does Mark consent to the separation?

Oh, I forgot to add that part.
No, Mark does not consent.

Then yes it would be immoral.

And forcing Tom to stay joined (and thereby die) is moral?

Well, I guess more questions have to be asked to the OP.

If they stay joined, and Tom dies, would Mark have to live with a dead Tom on him for the rest of his life?

Could they separate after Tom dies, but not before? Or, would any separation cause Mark to die?
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 12:45:12 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 12:33:43 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/7/2013 12:05:20 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:32:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:57 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

It all depends, does Mark consent to the separation?

Oh, I forgot to add that part.
No, Mark does not consent.

Then yes it would be immoral.

And forcing Tom to stay joined (and thereby die) is moral?

Well, I guess more questions have to be asked to the OP.

If they stay joined, and Tom dies, would Mark have to live with a dead Tom on him for the rest of his life?

Could they separate after Tom dies, but not before? Or, would any separation cause Mark to die?

Any separation would cause Mark to die, I suppose.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Orangatang
Posts: 442
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 4:57:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:28:03 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
What the f*ck is wrong with you dude. I hate these dilemmas

What the f*ck is wrong with you dude. These are quite interesting. I think I'm going to make a post of many of these dilemmas now.
Read and Vote Please! http://www.debate.org...
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 3:29:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/7/2013 12:45:12 AM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 8/7/2013 12:33:43 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/7/2013 12:05:20 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:32:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:57 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:31:22 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

It all depends, does Mark consent to the separation?

Oh, I forgot to add that part.
No, Mark does not consent.

Then yes it would be immoral.

And forcing Tom to stay joined (and thereby die) is moral?

Well, I guess more questions have to be asked to the OP.

If they stay joined, and Tom dies, would Mark have to live with a dead Tom on him for the rest of his life?

Could they separate after Tom dies, but not before? Or, would any separation cause Mark to die?

Any separation would cause Mark to die, I suppose.

Ok, then I guess Tom lives. He gets to live a normal life without a dead body attached to him all the time. Mark would have to live with a dead body attached to him. Since Tom would live a richer life than Mark if he survived, it is better if he lives.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 5:23:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:28:03 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
What the f*ck is wrong with you dude. I hate these dilemmas

Ding.. Ding.. Ding!!!

You got the Right Answer!
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 5:49:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I hate questions like this because they're so pointless. These things don't happen in real life - as in there would be no reason for the physicians not to attempt to separate and keep both people alive - despite whatever dismal probabilities forewarn such an attempt. If you're simply trying to invoke and question our ethical standards by applying them to a difficult circumstance, the question is still pointless because there are no real ethical standards. We're reactionary and instinctive creatures - philosophical ethics unsuccessfully attempts to formalize these emotions. So if this were a real life case, no one would feel compelled to consult a standard, and judgments will be made entirely based on what feels right.

Lastly, if the purpose here is just to inquire what feels right, then we're operating outside the hypothetical world and formalized ethics, which means the unrealistic simplicity of your scenario inhibits any applicable feeling.

So, long story short. I'm not answering your question because there's no point in doing so.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Df0512
Posts: 966
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2013 7:16:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

If Tom does not consent, yes it is immoral. Do conjoined twins count as 1 person or 2? You would think 2 but is there any situations where they would be counted as one?
MC1R
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2013 1:17:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/6/2013 11:23:29 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
Consider the following: Two conjoined twins, called Tom and Mark, were born, say, twenty years ago. They both are able to understand the consequences of consenting to an action, and are capable of clear reasoning. Tom wants to be separated from the other, since he will die if they stay together. However, by separating, Mark will die.

Is it immoral for Tom to separate from Mark?

If Tom separates, Mark will die. If Mark stays, Tom will die, but since they can't separate, Mark will be living with dead Tom dragging beside him. If they wait, Tom will die anyway. Time is obviously of the essence, and it seems that the life of Tom is the only one that can truly be saved.

So is it immoral for Tom to separate?

Medically speaking, it seems that it is the best course of action for him to do so. Philosophically speaking, it depends on to what extent we believe we should sacrifice ourselves to the aid of another. If sacrificing ourselves helps someone in need, perhaps it is the right course of action. But if sacrificing ourselves makes little impact, are we sacrificing ourselves for a worthy cause? Whose job is it to decide if the cause is worthy enough?

I believe it is moral for Tom to separate, because the death of Mark is inevitable, and he will be able to save a life if he does what is best for him.