Can the end justify the means?

[Duncan Berry]

Sorry if this has been done before, i did a quick search but didnt see anything. If it has feel free to delete.

So can the end justify the means?

That age old saying, is it right to kill 1 to save a 1000?

 

[Robbo]

There are no definitive answers to this question I'm afraid, merely opinions ... but it's good to see some people's opinions bearing in mind we will all come at this from vastly differing angles ... angles such as religious, moral and legal, all serve to confuse, none of which succeeding in totally clarifying.

It's easy to acknowledge the number crunch of a thousand deaths to one but it comes at the expense of breaking one of life's fundamental rules, murder.
To kill another human is an immoral act and goes against every form of humanity you care to reference.

As long as you can square that circle of the conflicting morality, legality and maybe religious agendas, you will have no problem in pulling that trigger.

Factor in all of the differing agendas society reflects and you have the recipe for a question that can never be answered definitively.
Have fun

 

[Duncan Berry]

of course robbo i totaly agree there never can be an answer to a philosophical question such as this i was just looking for peoples views and to get some healthy debate going

 

[Robbo]

Oh I knew that D, and I also look forward to people's opinions on the matter.

 

[Duncan Berry]

i'll nail my colours the mast so to speak

As the lesser of two evils, i'd have to say yes i would.
Now having never killed someone i cant say how i would react/live with the thought of doing such an act, the only thing i can think is that knowing i saved a 1000 could justify the act in my mind, yet that doesnt mean that i wouldnt be affected by such an act.

 

[Robbo]

I think there are two considerations here, firstly the principle and then the act itself.
It's all well and good conceding it's appropriate to kill one man to save a thousand but .. could you pull the trigger?

And as a further consideration, what if that one person who was to be sacrificed for the greater good was a child .. does anything change here ????

I mean, I could pull the trigger on an adult male for the greater good but I could not if it were a child which is kinda perplexing after conceding the principle .....Hmmm ..... things are never easy it seems ...

 

[Duncan Berry]

could you pull the trigger?

Having never been in that situation i couldnt genuinly answer but i'd like to say yes knowing i'm doing it for the greater good

what if that one person who was to be sacrificed for the greater good was a child?

now that one gets tricky and claws at the very moral fibre of a person.
To be honest i just dont know, i mean in the big a picture its obvious that you should but society breeds it into you that killing of a child is one of the ultimate taboo's and so when faced with such a choice the only way i think would be to switch off but could you live with yourself afterwards?

 

[Canon Fodder]

I couldn't, I'd struggle to kill even a chicken to eat it, quite happy to eat it but squemish about the act itself.

rationally I think it would be justified to kill one to save 1,000 , if I could give an order for it to happen I probably would but the guilt of it would haunt me forever.

I think a much more interesting question is could you kill that one if it were yourself or a member of your family?

 

[sabianfan]

It's difficult because im sure the act of shooting someone which is probably considered one of the more refined methods of killing a person would be way more gruesome to actually see happen then what any of us have seen in movies or on tv. I bet its f*in horrible.

 

[DJForbes]

simple answer is yes. however at the end of the day it would depend who the one person was and who the 1000 were. i for example wouldnt care to much about 1000 random unknow people but would care if it was my family.

id also care if the one to die ha dillness criminal records etc or if he gave his/her free time to helping others