Total Posts:93|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Kill the fat man and save the kids?

Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 6:23:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
No, I have no right to take a man's life, even if it is to save another. Considering he is a rational man and it is his own life, the decision must be of his own to sacrifice himself.
Nolite Timere
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 6:27:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.

I would watch the kids did and then push the fat man over the edge to ensure the maximum number if deaths. Speaking strictly from an anti-natalism perspective, as that would be the greatest mercy I could give.

If I valued human life though then yes I would push the fat man if I was confident it would save the kid's lives. So there, you have 2 answers in one!
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 7:34:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 6:23:43 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
No, I have no right to take a man's life, even if it is to save another. Considering he is a rational man and it is his own life, the decision must be of his own to sacrifice himself.

Interesting. Moral objectivity yes?
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
YYW
Posts: 36,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 9:20:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
There is an overlooked solution to this problem that I feel compelled to bring up:

Deep ecologists would suggest that we push them all in front of the train.
Tsar of DDO
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 9:27:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.

I don't believe in good and evil. It's a simple equation. 5>1.

If you kill the man, you save 5 lives.
If you do nothing, you kill 5 lives, for when one has the power to do something but doesn't act, one is still responsible for it.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 10:07:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 6:27:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.

I would watch the kids did and then push the fat man over the edge to ensure the maximum number if deaths. Speaking strictly from an anti-natalism perspective, as that would be the greatest mercy I could give.

Thanks for the answers but some theres some stuff i want to question.

Even if you become the most anti natalistic, anti human life person in the world, killing both people will still make you feel guilty afterwards. In threory, you might do it, but in reality? You wouldnt be so eager to kill and later suffer regret.
If I valued human life though then yes I would push the fat man if I was confident it would save the kid's lives. So there, you have 2 answers in one!

If you value human life? Will you doubt you do in that situation? Even if u are certain that killing the fat man saves the lives of the kids, in reality would you actually work up the guts to kill this fat stranger? I am surprised that your answer is similar to the answers i get from my friends and family. Usually people will answer the question as if its just a theory, something that will never happen to them. But what if it does happen, what if you really had to do decide? Are you sure you know what you will do?
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
9spaceking
Posts: 4,213
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 10:16:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.
the fat man is obese and doesn't respect his life anyways.
Equestrian election
http://www.debate.org...

This House would impose democracy
http://www.debate.org...

Reign of Terror is unjustified
http://www.debate.org...

Raise min. wage to $10.10
http://www.debate.org...
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 10:36:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 9:27:37 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.

I don't believe in good and evil. It's a simple equation. 5>1.

If you kill the man, you save 5 lives.
If you do nothing, you kill 5 lives, for when one has the power to do something but doesn't act, one is still responsible for it.

But then you are responsible for the death of the fat man. Whos to say he deserved to die? And the fat man may have children of his own, killing him makes these children fatherless and they may grow ip as criminals seeking revenge. Or, the children you saved may again grow up as killers, thereby killing people and making you responsible for it because you saved their lives. Its a simple equation but with no absolute logical concluson. Another scenario is if your in a zombie apocalypse, there is a group of people in need of saving, and you have your own group. Would yyou save the group in need? What if they betray you and steal your food to survive? Or worse, kill ur comrades. But what if there are more people in that group than the people in yours. Is it then, a matter of how many lives you save?
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 10:38:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 10:16:20 PM, 9spaceking wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.
the fat man is obese and doesn't respect his life anyways.
Says the fat santa clause lol. But if u were to take the question seriously, what would you answer?
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 10:39:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 9:20:16 PM, YYW wrote:
There is an overlooked solution to this problem that I feel compelled to bring up:

Deep ecologists would suggest that we push them all in front of the train.

Meh, i suppose that works.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
9spaceking
Posts: 4,213
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 10:40:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 10:38:16 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:16:20 PM, 9spaceking wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.
the fat man is obese and doesn't respect his life anyways.
Says the fat santa clause lol. But if u were to take the question seriously, what would you answer?

the fat man must be killed to save those kids.
It would be a much harder question if it were killing a kid to save 5 old men; those men have lived their lives through and through while the kid still has at least 80 more years to go...And I would actually kill the old men if they were over 80 years old,,,they aren't living exciting awesome lives anyways.
Equestrian election
http://www.debate.org...

This House would impose democracy
http://www.debate.org...

Reign of Terror is unjustified
http://www.debate.org...

Raise min. wage to $10.10
http://www.debate.org...
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 10:49:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 10:40:17 PM, 9spaceking wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:38:16 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:16:20 PM, 9spaceking wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.
the fat man is obese and doesn't respect his life anyways.
Says the fat santa clause lol. But if u were to take the question seriously, what would you answer?

the fat man must be killed to save those kids.
It would be a much harder question if it were killing a kid to save 5 old men; those men have lived their lives through and through while the kid still has at least 80 more years to go...And I would actually kill the old men if they were over 80 years old,,,they aren't living exciting awesome lives anyways.

Yeah. Maybe even harder is if it were killing a man over a kid. Then its sort of balanced
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 11:04:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 10:36:27 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:27:37 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.

I don't believe in good and evil. It's a simple equation. 5>1.

If you kill the man, you save 5 lives.
If you do nothing, you kill 5 lives, for when one has the power to do something but doesn't act, one is still responsible for it.

But then you are responsible for the death of the fat man. Whos to say he deserved to die? And the fat man may have children of his own, killing him makes these children fatherless and they may grow ip as criminals seeking revenge. Or, the children you saved may again grow up as killers, thereby killing people and making you responsible for it because you saved their lives. Its a simple equation but with no absolute logical concluson. Another scenario is if your in a zombie apocalypse, there is a group of people in need of saving, and you have your own group. Would yyou save the group in need? What if they betray you and steal your food to survive? Or worse, kill ur comrades. But what if there are more people in that group than the people in yours. Is it then, a matter of how many lives you save?

That is the only absolute logical conclusion. Everything you're bringing in is an outside, subjective factor, irrelevant to the theory at hand.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 11:21:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 11:04:47 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:36:27 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:27:37 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.

I don't believe in good and evil. It's a simple equation. 5>1.

If you kill the man, you save 5 lives.
If you do nothing, you kill 5 lives, for when one has the power to do something but doesn't act, one is still responsible for it.

But then you are responsible for the death of the fat man. Whos to say he deserved to die? And the fat man may have children of his own, killing him makes these children fatherless and they may grow ip as criminals seeking revenge. Or, the children you saved may again grow up as killers, thereby killing people and making you responsible for it because you saved their lives. Its a simple equation but with no absolute logical concluson. Another scenario is if your in a zombie apocalypse, there is a group of people in need of saving, and you have your own group. Would yyou save the group in need? What if they betray you and steal your food to survive? Or worse, kill ur comrades. But what if there are more people in that group than the people in yours. Is it then, a matter of how many lives you save?

That is the only absolute logical conclusion. Everything you're bringing in is an outside, subjective factor, irrelevant to the theory at hand.

Oh well, if you say so. But would you actually do it? I you really were in that situation, would you really kill the fat man?
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 11:27:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 11:21:28 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:04:47 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:36:27 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:27:37 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.

I don't believe in good and evil. It's a simple equation. 5>1.

If you kill the man, you save 5 lives.
If you do nothing, you kill 5 lives, for when one has the power to do something but doesn't act, one is still responsible for it.

But then you are responsible for the death of the fat man. Whos to say he deserved to die? And the fat man may have children of his own, killing him makes these children fatherless and they may grow ip as criminals seeking revenge. Or, the children you saved may again grow up as killers, thereby killing people and making you responsible for it because you saved their lives. Its a simple equation but with no absolute logical concluson. Another scenario is if your in a zombie apocalypse, there is a group of people in need of saving, and you have your own group. Would yyou save the group in need? What if they betray you and steal your food to survive? Or worse, kill ur comrades. But what if there are more people in that group than the people in yours. Is it then, a matter of how many lives you save?

That is the only absolute logical conclusion. Everything you're bringing in is an outside, subjective factor, irrelevant to the theory at hand.

Oh well, if you say so. But would you actually do it? I you really were in that situation, would you really kill the fat man?

In that situation, no, because it wouldn't stop the train.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 11:28:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 11:27:57 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:21:28 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:04:47 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:36:27 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:27:37 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.

I don't believe in good and evil. It's a simple equation. 5>1.

If you kill the man, you save 5 lives.
If you do nothing, you kill 5 lives, for when one has the power to do something but doesn't act, one is still responsible for it.

But then you are responsible for the death of the fat man. Whos to say he deserved to die? And the fat man may have children of his own, killing him makes these children fatherless and they may grow ip as criminals seeking revenge. Or, the children you saved may again grow up as killers, thereby killing people and making you responsible for it because you saved their lives. Its a simple equation but with no absolute logical concluson. Another scenario is if your in a zombie apocalypse, there is a group of people in need of saving, and you have your own group. Would yyou save the group in need? What if they betray you and steal your food to survive? Or worse, kill ur comrades. But what if there are more people in that group than the people in yours. Is it then, a matter of how many lives you save?

That is the only absolute logical conclusion. Everything you're bringing in is an outside, subjective factor, irrelevant to the theory at hand.

Oh well, if you say so. But would you actually do it? I you really were in that situation, would you really kill the fat man?

In that situation, no, because it wouldn't stop the train.

And what of a situation where it does stop the train?
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 11:29:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 11:28:53 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:27:57 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:21:28 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:04:47 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:36:27 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:27:37 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.

I don't believe in good and evil. It's a simple equation. 5>1.

If you kill the man, you save 5 lives.
If you do nothing, you kill 5 lives, for when one has the power to do something but doesn't act, one is still responsible for it.

But then you are responsible for the death of the fat man. Whos to say he deserved to die? And the fat man may have children of his own, killing him makes these children fatherless and they may grow ip as criminals seeking revenge. Or, the children you saved may again grow up as killers, thereby killing people and making you responsible for it because you saved their lives. Its a simple equation but with no absolute logical concluson. Another scenario is if your in a zombie apocalypse, there is a group of people in need of saving, and you have your own group. Would yyou save the group in need? What if they betray you and steal your food to survive? Or worse, kill ur comrades. But what if there are more people in that group than the people in yours. Is it then, a matter of how many lives you save?

That is the only absolute logical conclusion. Everything you're bringing in is an outside, subjective factor, irrelevant to the theory at hand.

Oh well, if you say so. But would you actually do it? I you really were in that situation, would you really kill the fat man?

In that situation, no, because it wouldn't stop the train.

And what of a situation where it does stop the train?

Then yes.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 11:30:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 11:29:14 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:28:53 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:27:57 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:21:28 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 11:04:47 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:36:27 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:27:37 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 7/27/2014 7:44:40 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:35 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
In theory, yes, but that wouldn't stop the train in reality, so...

Interesting that you would kill the man even in theory. You have no idea if the kids on the track will grow up evil, kill other people but you will risk killing the fat man (who might be innocent) and saving these kids who are complete strangers to you. Let us assume that one day you find yourself in a situation with this kind of moral dilemma, what would you do? But if you dont do anything and let the children die, you may live in guilt forever. Kill the fat man however and you will feel the same guilt. Honestly it will be the shitiest day of your life if you find youself in a conundrum like this.

I don't believe in good and evil. It's a simple equation. 5>1.

If you kill the man, you save 5 lives.
If you do nothing, you kill 5 lives, for when one has the power to do something but doesn't act, one is still responsible for it.

But then you are responsible for the death of the fat man. Whos to say he deserved to die? And the fat man may have children of his own, killing him makes these children fatherless and they may grow ip as criminals seeking revenge. Or, the children you saved may again grow up as killers, thereby killing people and making you responsible for it because you saved their lives. Its a simple equation but with no absolute logical concluson. Another scenario is if your in a zombie apocalypse, there is a group of people in need of saving, and you have your own group. Would yyou save the group in need? What if they betray you and steal your food to survive? Or worse, kill ur comrades. But what if there are more people in that group than the people in yours. Is it then, a matter of how many lives you save?

That is the only absolute logical conclusion. Everything you're bringing in is an outside, subjective factor, irrelevant to the theory at hand.

Oh well, if you say so. But would you actually do it? I you really were in that situation, would you really kill the fat man?

In that situation, no, because it wouldn't stop the train.

And what of a situation where it does stop the train?

Then yes.

Wow.... You are the first person that I have heard such an honest answer from. Very interesting. Thanks for the reply.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 11:33:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 7:34:01 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:23:43 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
No, I have no right to take a man's life, even if it is to save another. Considering he is a rational man and it is his own life, the decision must be of his own to sacrifice himself.

Interesting. Moral objectivity yes?

I am a moral objectivist, but I find that irrelevant to my answer. I believe in the right to bodily autonomy. To push that man in front of a train is to degrade his human dignity and free will. As it is his body or more importantly his life, he should have the sole decision as to whether or not he saves those kids.
Nolite Timere
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2014 11:34:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 11:33:00 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 7/27/2014 7:34:01 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:23:43 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
No, I have no right to take a man's life, even if it is to save another. Considering he is a rational man and it is his own life, the decision must be of his own to sacrifice himself.

Interesting. Moral objectivity yes?

I am a moral objectivist, but I find that irrelevant to my answer. I believe in the right to bodily autonomy. To push that man in front of a train is to degrade his human dignity and free will. As it is his body or more importantly his life, he should have the sole decision as to whether or not he saves those kids.

Hey wow, I have the same beliefs! Double interesting.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
toolpot462
Posts: 289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 1:43:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
If I knew the train would actually be stopped, I would kill the fat man to save the kids; though it's true that I alone would be responsible for the man's death.

If a man contracted a disease that only you knew about, which would result in the deaths of millions unless you killed the man, would I do it? Yes, because although I would be responsible for the man's death, in the end it would save more lives. You could say "what if those millions of people became serial killers?", but that's not a reasonable consideration. The fact is, if you didn't stop the disease from spreading and everyone found out about it, you would be held responsible (emotionally, not legally) for the deaths of those millions of people.

Inaction is a choice, and in this case it directly results in more deaths.

For instance: if the situation were simplified, and you were forced to choose whether 5 kids would be executed or one man, you could say, "I have no right to take the life of that man, so I choose to let the children die," and we can immediately see the issue. If you have no "right" to take the man's life, then you have no "right" to take the children's lives, and therefore no "right" to make any decision at all - but you have to make a decision regardless.
I'll be the one to protect you from
Your enemies and all your demons.
I'll be the one to protect you from
A will to survive and a voice of reason.
I'll be the one to protect you from
Your enemies and your choices, son.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 2:11:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/28/2014 1:43:06 AM, toolpot462 wrote:
If I knew the train would actually be stopped, I would kill the fat man to save the kids; though it's true that I alone would be responsible for the man's death.

If a man contracted a disease that only you knew about, which would result in the deaths of millions unless you killed the man, would I do it? Yes, because although I would be responsible for the man's death, in the end it would save more lives. You could say "what if those millions of people became serial killers?", but that's not a reasonable consideration. The fact is, if you didn't stop the disease from spreading and everyone found out about it, you would be held responsible (emotionally, not legally) for the deaths of those millions of people.

Inaction is a choice, and in this case it directly results in more deaths.

For instance: if the situation were simplified, and you were forced to choose whether 5 kids would be executed or one man, you could say, "I have no right to take the life of that man, so I choose to let the children die," and we can immediately see the issue. If you have no "right" to take the man's life, then you have no "right" to take the children's lives, and therefore no "right" to make any decision at all - but you have to make a decision regardless.

Yes, yes i agree. But what if that one person carrying the disease was your daughter. Would you still kill her for the sake of the lives of those you do not know?
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
toolpot462
Posts: 289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 2:15:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/28/2014 2:11:04 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/28/2014 1:43:06 AM, toolpot462 wrote:
If I knew the train would actually be stopped, I would kill the fat man to save the kids; though it's true that I alone would be responsible for the man's death.

If a man contracted a disease that only you knew about, which would result in the deaths of millions unless you killed the man, would I do it? Yes, because although I would be responsible for the man's death, in the end it would save more lives. You could say "what if those millions of people became serial killers?", but that's not a reasonable consideration. The fact is, if you didn't stop the disease from spreading and everyone found out about it, you would be held responsible (emotionally, not legally) for the deaths of those millions of people.

Inaction is a choice, and in this case it directly results in more deaths.

For instance: if the situation were simplified, and you were forced to choose whether 5 kids would be executed or one man, you could say, "I have no right to take the life of that man, so I choose to let the children die," and we can immediately see the issue. If you have no "right" to take the man's life, then you have no "right" to take the children's lives, and therefore no "right" to make any decision at all - but you have to make a decision regardless.

Yes, yes i agree. But what if that one person carrying the disease was your daughter. Would you still kill her for the sake of the lives of those you do not know?

I don't have a daughter or son, so it's hard to say. Presumably, she would die either way, though. But, supposing she wouldn't, I lean toward choosing my daughter. Still a hell of a scenario, though.
I'll be the one to protect you from
Your enemies and all your demons.
I'll be the one to protect you from
A will to survive and a voice of reason.
I'll be the one to protect you from
Your enemies and your choices, son.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 2:20:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/28/2014 2:15:41 AM, toolpot462 wrote:
At 7/28/2014 2:11:04 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/28/2014 1:43:06 AM, toolpot462 wrote:
If I knew the train would actually be stopped, I would kill the fat man to save the kids; though it's true that I alone would be responsible for the man's death.

If a man contracted a disease that only you knew about, which would result in the deaths of millions unless you killed the man, would I do it? Yes, because although I would be responsible for the man's death, in the end it would save more lives. You could say "what if those millions of people became serial killers?", but that's not a reasonable consideration. The fact is, if you didn't stop the disease from spreading and everyone found out about it, you would be held responsible (emotionally, not legally) for the deaths of those millions of people.

Inaction is a choice, and in this case it directly results in more deaths.

For instance: if the situation were simplified, and you were forced to choose whether 5 kids would be executed or one man, you could say, "I have no right to take the life of that man, so I choose to let the children die," and we can immediately see the issue. If you have no "right" to take the man's life, then you have no "right" to take the children's lives, and therefore no "right" to make any decision at all - but you have to make a decision regardless.

Yes, yes i agree. But what if that one person carrying the disease was your daughter. Would you still kill her for the sake of the lives of those you do not know?

I don't have a daughter or son, so it's hard to say. Presumably, she would die either way, though. But, supposing she wouldn't, I lean toward choosing my daughter. Still a hell of a scenario, though.

Yes it is. If you don't kill your daughter/son/mother or father then billions of daughters, sons, mothers and fathers will die.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 3:38:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/27/2014 10:07:15 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.

I would watch the kids did and then push the fat man over the edge to ensure the maximum number if deaths. Speaking strictly from an anti-natalism perspective, as that would be the greatest mercy I could give.

Thanks for the answers but some theres some stuff i want to question.

Even if you become the most anti natalistic, anti human life person in the world, killing both people will still make you feel guilty afterwards. In threory, you might do it, but in reality? You wouldnt be so eager to kill and later suffer regret.

So what? I would have saved 6 sentient beings from a sufferable existance. And I can't imagine feeling guilty if I genuinely thought I was doing the right thing. In fact it would be a fond memory.

If I valued human life though then yes I would push the fat man if I was confident it would save the kid's lives. So there, you have 2 answers in one!

If you value human life? Will you doubt you do in that situation? Even if u are certain that killing the fat man saves the lives of the kids, in reality would you actually work up the guts to kill this fat stranger?

Yes, I would.

I am surprised that your answer is similar to the answers i get from my friends and family. Usually people will answer the question as if its just a theory, something that will never happen to them. But what if it does happen, what if you really had to do decide? Are you sure you know what you will do?

If the situation was black and white in the manner you depict, then the choice is easy. It seldom is black and white though. I for one would doubt that dropping the fat guy would stop a train.
Adam_Godzilla
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2014 3:41:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/28/2014 3:38:16 AM, Envisage wrote:
At 7/27/2014 10:07:15 PM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
At 7/27/2014 6:27:38 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 7/27/2014 9:36:07 AM, Adam_Godzilla wrote:
A popular question. If you are standing on a bridge above a railway track, a fat man is beside you, you see 5 little kids stuck on the track and a train is about to pass below and hit the kids - would you push the fat man off the bridge to stop the train? Its interesting how people answer this in my community so i am interestef in what the DDO people think.

I would watch the kids did and then push the fat man over the edge to ensure the maximum number if deaths. Speaking strictly from an anti-natalism perspective, as that would be the greatest mercy I could give.

Thanks for the answers but some theres some stuff i want to question.

Even if you become the most anti natalistic, anti human life person in the world, killing both people will still make you feel guilty afterwards. In threory, you might do it, but in reality? You wouldnt be so eager to kill and later suffer regret.

So what? I would have saved 6 sentient beings from a sufferable existance. And I can't imagine feeling guilty if I genuinely thought I was doing the right thing. In fact it would be a fond memory.

If I valued human life though then yes I would push the fat man if I was confident it would save the kid's lives. So there, you have 2 answers in one!

If you value human life? Will you doubt you do in that situation? Even if u are certain that killing the fat man saves the lives of the kids, in reality would you actually work up the guts to kill this fat stranger?

Yes, I would.

I am surprised that your answer is similar to the answers i get from my friends and family. Usually people will answer the question as if its just a theory, something that will never happen to them. But what if it does happen, what if you really had to do decide? Are you sure you know what you will do?

If the situation was black and white in the manner you depict, then the choice is easy. It seldom is black and white though. I for one would doubt that dropping the fat guy would stop a train.

Hmmm.... Okay. Thanks for your answer. It was interesting.
New episode of OUTSIDERS: http://www.debate.org...
Episode 4 - They walk among us