RE: On morality: Death vs extreme suffering
May 8, 2009 at 8:58 pm
(This post was last modified: May 8, 2009 at 8:59 pm by Oldandeasilyconfused.)
@Evidence of faith.
You seem to be asking; "Can it be argued that the ends justify the means?"
An egoist,utilitarian and moral relativist,my position is "Yes of course". This is also how the world actually operates in reality. Kill one to save 1000, or 20, or 5 or 2? Yes. Allow one die slowly in agony to save others? Yes. (although I'm not sure how I'd feel if I was the one )
On a societal, level I believe the guiding principle should be "the greatest good for the greatest number". That the individual is of limited or no importance to society as a whole. This position is purely pragmatic. I see it as the best way to ensure the survival of the species.However,I may be mistaken. This my opinion,not the premise for an argument.
You seem to be asking; "Can it be argued that the ends justify the means?"
An egoist,utilitarian and moral relativist,my position is "Yes of course". This is also how the world actually operates in reality. Kill one to save 1000, or 20, or 5 or 2? Yes. Allow one die slowly in agony to save others? Yes. (although I'm not sure how I'd feel if I was the one )
On a societal, level I believe the guiding principle should be "the greatest good for the greatest number". That the individual is of limited or no importance to society as a whole. This position is purely pragmatic. I see it as the best way to ensure the survival of the species.However,I may be mistaken. This my opinion,not the premise for an argument.
