Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

Why is Murder Bad?

Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2016 2:48:31 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
I came up with 4 reasons why murder is bad because often we simply assume it is always bad no matter what. According to my list, in order for murder to be considered wrong, at LEAST one of these reasons must be violated. Please help me refine this list by maybe suggesting a person who does not qualify for any of these, and yet the murder is still wrong. Thanks!

1. Murder is bad because the victim will feel the immediate pain of dying, which they are capable of feeling, and it is against their will to feel this.

2. Murder is bad because the victim is aware that they are alive, and they have a will to remain alive, thus it is against their will to be taken out of life.

3. Murder is bad because other people have a will to keep said victim alive, and thus it is against their will that the victim be killed.

4. Murder is bad because when done to anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, then it justifies the act to anyone else with any of the three previous reasons being true. The killing of anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, is wrong, and thus it is wrong to justify a wrong.
JR
Filmmaker/Inventor/Determinist/ENFP
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2016 3:20:30 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/21/2016 2:48:31 AM, Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist wrote:
I came up with 4 reasons why murder is bad because often we simply assume it is always bad no matter what. According to my list, in order for murder to be considered wrong, at LEAST one of these reasons must be violated. Please help me refine this list by maybe suggesting a person who does not qualify for any of these, and yet the murder is still wrong. Thanks!

1. Murder is bad because the victim will feel the immediate pain of dying, which they are capable of feeling, and it is against their will to feel this.

2. Murder is bad because the victim is aware that they are alive, and they have a will to remain alive, thus it is against their will to be taken out of life.

3. Murder is bad because other people have a will to keep said victim alive, and thus it is against their will that the victim be killed.

4. Murder is bad because when done to anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, then it justifies the act to anyone else with any of the three previous reasons being true. The killing of anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, is wrong, and thus it is wrong to justify a wrong.

Be careful with the word "murder" because it is, in practice, a legal term. Especially when used with concepts such as "murder is always bad", as this phrase connotes objective morality (i.e. categorical imperative: murder is always bad), which conflicts with the fact that legal terms are not constructed in such rigidity.

If you don't agree with me, I challenge you to find a credible definition of murder that does not hold the implicit assumption (or explicit) that it is a legal term.
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2016 6:00:29 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
Be careful with the word "murder" because it is, in practice, a legal term. Especially when used with concepts such as "murder is always bad", as this phrase connotes objective morality (i.e. categorical imperative: murder is always bad), which conflicts with the fact that legal terms are not constructed in such rigidity.

If you don't agree with me, I challenge you to find a credible definition of murder that does not hold the implicit assumption (or explicit) that it is a legal term.

That's a good point. Smart catch. In that case I really mean to use the word (intentional) killing. Also to make it clear, by "bad" I really mean, morally wrong philosophically.
Thanks for the tip.
JR
Filmmaker/Inventor/Determinist/ENFP
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2016 6:01:44 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/21/2016 6:00:29 AM, Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist wrote:
Be careful with the word "murder" because it is, in practice, a legal term. Especially when used with concepts such as "murder is always bad", as this phrase connotes objective morality (i.e. categorical imperative: murder is always bad), which conflicts with the fact that legal terms are not constructed in such rigidity.

If you don't agree with me, I challenge you to find a credible definition of murder that does not hold the implicit assumption (or explicit) that it is a legal term.

That's a good point. Smart catch. In that case I really mean to use the word (intentional) killing. Also to make it clear, by "bad" I really mean, morally wrong philosophically.

This looks much better.

Thanks for the tip.

Not a problem; happy to help =)
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
keithprosser
Posts: 1,899
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2016 7:25:22 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At the risk of taking some flak, it could be murder is bad because the right to life exists objectively.
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2016 8:10:43 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/21/2016 6:00:29 AM, Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist wrote:
Be careful with the word "murder" because it is, in practice, a legal term. Especially when used with concepts such as "murder is always bad", as this phrase connotes objective morality (i.e. categorical imperative: murder is always bad), which conflicts with the fact that legal terms are not constructed in such rigidity.

If you don't agree with me, I challenge you to find a credible definition of murder that does not hold the implicit assumption (or explicit) that it is a legal term.

That's a good point. Smart catch. In that case I really mean to use the word (intentional) killing. Also to make it clear, by "bad" I really mean, morally wrong philosophically.
Thanks for the tip.

so, killing is bad for who? it's not bad for the seral killer, it's not bad for the bank robber to save his own skin and get the message across he means business. it's not bad for combatants, it's not bad for a police officer defending a helpless citizen, or himself for that matter. why is your individual judgement of what is bad for you, bad for everyone else. doesn't that set yourself above others, who it might not be bad for?
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,861
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2016 6:04:25 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/21/2016 2:48:31 AM, Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist wrote:
I came up with 4 reasons why murder is bad because often we simply assume it is always bad no matter what. According to my list, in order for murder to be considered wrong, at LEAST one of these reasons must be violated. Please help me refine this list by maybe suggesting a person who does not qualify for any of these, and yet the murder is still wrong. Thanks!

1. Murder is bad because the victim will feel the immediate pain of dying, which they are capable of feeling, and it is against their will to feel this.
They say a .45 caliber shot to the head the person doesn't even hear the gun. Nobody knows if pains is ever felt. I broke my leg in 7 places in an accident and it took over an hour to feel any pain, go figure.
2. Murder is bad because the victim is aware that they are alive, and they have a will to remain alive, thus it is against their will to be taken out of life.
So if the person wants to die it ok?
3. Murder is bad because other people have a will to keep said victim alive, and thus it is against their will that the victim be killed.

4. Murder is bad because when done to anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, then it justifies the act to anyone else with any of the three previous reasons being true. The killing of anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, is wrong, and thus it is wrong to justify a wrong.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,861
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/22/2016 11:24:44 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/21/2016 2:48:31 AM, Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist wrote:
I came up with 4 reasons why murder is bad because often we simply assume it is always bad no matter what. According to my list, in order for murder to be considered wrong, at LEAST one of these reasons must be violated. Please help me refine this list by maybe suggesting a person who does not qualify for any of these, and yet the murder is still wrong. Thanks!

1. Murder is bad because the victim will feel the immediate pain of dying, which they are capable of feeling, and it is against their will to feel this.
This is a pointless reason because a .45 caliber bullet to the head is instantaneous death and there isn't an experience of pain. Explanation is the bullet travels faster than nerves are capable of transmitting so pain never is felt.
2. Murder is bad because the victim is aware that they are alive, and they have a will to remain alive, thus it is against their will to be taken out of life.
If no will to remain alive exists in someone than killing them is ok?
3. Murder is bad because other people have a will to keep said victim alive, and thus it is against their will that the victim be killed.

4. Murder is bad because when done to anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, then it justifies the act to anyone else with any of the three previous reasons being true. The killing of anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, is wrong, and thus it is wrong to justify a wrong.
So if a person murders a homeless person that has no stable relationships of any kind and they are constantly moving from place to place. They are killed, the body is disposed of and never found or discovered to be missing. Who decided the morality of the killing? This scenario only includes the 2 people involved, the killer and the killed, what then?
ViceRegent
Posts: 604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/23/2016 8:42:49 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/21/2016 2:48:31 AM, Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist wrote:
I came up with 4 reasons why murder is bad because often we simply assume it is always bad no matter what. According to my list, in order for murder to be considered wrong, at LEAST one of these reasons must be violated. Please help me refine this list by maybe suggesting a person who does not qualify for any of these, and yet the murder is still wrong. Thanks!

1. Murder is bad because the victim will feel the immediate pain of dying, which they are capable of feeling, and it is against their will to feel this.

2. Murder is bad because the victim is aware that they are alive, and they have a will to remain alive, thus it is against their will to be taken out of life.

3. Murder is bad because other people have a will to keep said victim alive, and thus it is against their will that the victim be killed.

4. Murder is bad because when done to anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, then it justifies the act to anyone else with any of the three previous reasons being true. The killing of anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, is wrong, and thus it is wrong to justify a wrong.

Murder is wrong because God says so because God is not a murderer.
Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2016 12:16:07 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/22/2016 11:24:44 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 4/21/2016 2:48:31 AM, Free_Will_Does_Not_Exist wrote:
I came up with 4 reasons why murder is bad because often we simply assume it is always bad no matter what. According to my list, in order for murder to be considered wrong, at LEAST one of these reasons must be violated. Please help me refine this list by maybe suggesting a person who does not qualify for any of these, and yet the murder is still wrong. Thanks!

1. Murder is bad because the victim will feel the immediate pain of dying, which they are capable of feeling, and it is against their will to feel this.
This is a pointless reason because a .45 caliber bullet to the head is instantaneous death and there isn't an experience of pain. Explanation is the bullet travels faster than nerves are capable of transmitting so pain never is felt.
2. Murder is bad because the victim is aware that they are alive, and they have a will to remain alive, thus it is against their will to be taken out of life.
If no will to remain alive exists in someone than killing them is ok?
3. Murder is bad because other people have a will to keep said victim alive, and thus it is against their will that the victim be killed.

4. Murder is bad because when done to anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, then it justifies the act to anyone else with any of the three previous reasons being true. The killing of anyone with any of the three previous reasons being true, is wrong, and thus it is wrong to justify a wrong.
So if a person murders a homeless person that has no stable relationships of any kind and they are constantly moving from place to place. They are killed, the body is disposed of and never found or discovered to be missing. Who decided the morality of the killing? This scenario only includes the 2 people involved, the killer and the killed, what then?

Well, yes. If the homeless person has an absolute will to die with no second thoughts, does not fear the pain of the way in which he will be killed knowing that the headshot from the .45 caliber will be painless, and they have absolutely nobody who wants them to be alive, then I see no morally wrong reason for this person to die. Would it still be against the law to kill this person? Of course, but the reason isn't because it's morally wrong but because killing is seen as wrong from a secular perspective. It does not matter who the killer kills. Now it is good to realize that for the second reason, if the person is delusional, their opinion to kill themselves is not valid. It must be their true will to live no longer.
JR
Filmmaker/Inventor/Determinist/ENFP
imperialchimp
Posts: 229
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2016 5:56:23 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/21/2016 7:25:22 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At the risk of taking some flak, it could be murder is bad because the right to life exists objectively.

The right to life is objective. Yet, I see it as a "do whatever you can to keep yourself alive" over a "he didn't deserve to die". This is the only reason why killing in self-defense is accepted.
Ape Lives Matter (ALM)

What if I were to tell you that humans have false logic? Prepare for confusion.

-.-- --- ..- / ... .... --- ..- .-.. -.. / .... .- ...- . / -. --- - / - .-. .- -. ... .-.. .- - . -.. / - .... .. ... .-.-.- .-.-.- .-.-.-
user13579
Posts: 822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2016 9:56:34 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
Natural selection favors societies in which murder is punished.
Science in a nutshell:
"Facts are neither true nor false. They simply are."
"All scientific knowledge is provisional. Even facts are provisional."
"We can be absolutely certain that we have a moon, we can be absolutely certain that water is made out of H2O, and we can be absolutely certain that the Earth is a sphere!"
"Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."
keithprosser
Posts: 1,899
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2016 10:45:15 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
I think natural selection produced humans that find killing psychologically difficult. Even soldiers who kill in a war and are rewarded, not punished, can suffer enormous guilt related problems. The threat of being punished prevents few murders - what prevents most murders is our reluctance to kill.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2016 1:10:01 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
I think it depends on who you murder.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater