RE: Moral Dilemma
February 18, 2014 at 5:10 pm
(This post was last modified: February 18, 2014 at 5:11 pm by Tonus.)
CD's response seems the most rational to me. The simplest way to look at it is, what action am I taking? I am either directly hurting a person or I am not. It is only my choice to harm the young girl in the room with me, NOT the loved one who is at the mercy of the villain. It is in fact his choice to harm my loved one if I refuse to harm the girl. In that case the choice is easy; I would not rape the young girl. Were our positions reversed, I can imagine that I would be extremely disturbed at the thought that someone violated a child just to spare me from torture.
Or to put it another way, what if you were on that end of it and afterwards you had to face that child and explain why it was better you than him/her?
Or to put it another way, what if you were on that end of it and afterwards you had to face that child and explain why it was better you than him/her?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould
