Is killing (humans) wrong?

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by Townsend

If something is justified, does that not make it right? Let's use the scenario of a gunman holding my family hostage. I would want to see my family continue to live, so I would kill the gunman. I think (nearly) everyone here would agree that it is justified to kill the gunman in this case. So why is it even necessary to bring abstract concepts like right and wrong into play? Isn't the justification reason enough?

Personally, I think it would be immoral not to kill the gunman in this situation. The only sin that is in my book is allowing myself or my loved one's to come into harm's way. If I can justify something for my gain, or the gain of someone close to me, then I have no problem doing it. Right and wrong are concepts that do not come into play.

That was ssandra's idea from the thread that it's justified but still wrong. I reached the conclusion that this discussion is absolutely pointless..

[Orecle]

Originally Posted by Townsend

If something is justified, does that not make it right? Let's use the scenario of a gunman holding my family hostage. I would want to see my family continue to live, so I would kill the gunman. I think (nearly) everyone here would agree that it is justified to kill the gunman in this case. So why is it even necessary to bring abstract concepts like right and wrong into play? Isn't the justification reason enough?

Personally, I think it would be immoral not to kill the gunman in this situation. The only sin that is in my book is allowing myself or my loved one's to come into harm's way. If I can justify something for my gain, or the gain of someone close to me, then I have no problem doing it. Right and wrong are concepts that do not come into play.

in my opinion it is right and justified to blast the gunman with my gun. if it is justified then it is right.

lets paint another scenario imagine if you shot the gunman and even though he had murdered over 50 people and you had been a model citezen. because you attempted to kill him, you were sentenced to death row. would that be justified. would it be justified to spend a second in a cell
NO.
Intention is what counts. Just like sex for love and sex for rape is different so is killing. if your country came under attack would you just sit there. would you be racked with guilt after?

lets take another - speeding

if you are racing down the street to diffuse a bomb only known to yourself. is it wrong? should the police not let you off for saving lives? would you not do the same in different circumstances?

[Remiel]

Did the word "Wrong" ever get truely defined?

Originally Posted by Orecle

lets take another - speeding

if you are racing down the street to diffuse a bomb only known to yourself. is it wrong? should the police not let you off for saving lives? would you not do the same in different circumstances?

I have to agree with you there. In fact all your points are great.

[Plato]

Guys, let me know when you're bored of everything being safe and secure.

I'll be with the people stirring things up a bit.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by ssandra

You can do one action that has 2 consequences. This means that the action was both wrong and right at the same time.

Good point. A single action can have multiple effects on different people. I hadn't thought about that. The effect on one person might be what you consider good; and at the same time the effect on another person can be what you consider bad.

Oh, what a muddle.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

Oh, what a muddle.

Indeed. Maybe you should let the most powerful computer in the world take care of these things.

It will if you stop bamboozling it with rules, and shoulds and self inflicted confusion.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by Plato

Indeed. Maybe you should let the most powerful computer in the world take care of these things.

It will if you stop bamboozling it with rules, and shoulds and self inflicted confusion.

Are you accusing ME of bamboozlement, good sir ? Indeed. *plans a devious revenge*

The computer will probably give the answer .. 43.

[Daffy Duck]

Rules aren't really confusing at all for my supercomputer. Morality is easy. Simple calculus requires more brainpower. I can't even remember one time where I had trouble deciding what was morally right or wrong. Probably just a bad memory. At most, if I take a couple minutes to consider the different consequences, the moral course of action for me becomes clear. I may ask others' opinions but I already know my answer.

I'm reminded of a saying, "Knowing your purpose simplifies your life. It defines what you do and don't do."

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

Rules aren't really confusing at all for my supercomputer. Morality is easy. Simple calculus requires more brainpower. I can't even remember one time where I had trouble deciding what was morally right or wrong. At most, if I take a couple minutes to consider the different consequences, the moral course of action for me becomes clear. I may ask others' opinions but I already know my answer.

I'm reminded of a saying, "Knowing your purpose simplifies your life. It defines what you do and don't do."

Purpose is not morality.

Once you have a purpose you can use reason to figure out how best to achieve it.

However, morality is a stupid construct that attempts to make objective generalisations about how a human should behave. It doesn't work, as evidenced by the thousands of years of failure that started with Socrates and followed through to Kant.

Philosophers now realise that morality is a farce. It is widely conceded. Now we're just waiting for society to catch up.

EDIT to make this relevant -- it's also been established that we perform best when we don't think. See Eckart Tolle. See most good books on Sports Psychology. See the works of Hubert Dreyfus. See Nietzsche. See Dostoyevsky.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by plays with life

the computer will probably give the answer .. 43.

lol

[Daffy Duck]

Just read this story: Free Manson 'family' members haunted by horror | Comcast.net

[Time]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

The thread "is murder wrong" got closed. I originally took that question as "is killing wrong". What do you think?

Apparently the word murder has an ambiguous definition .. I don't fully understand it. Some difference there between "murder" and "killing". By killing here, I mean causing the end of a human life.

I think this is a question that will get various answers depending on who's asking it.

If you were holding a gun to my head and asking it, of course I'd say yes emphatically.

But if there was a cop behind you, pointing a gun at your head, and ordering you to stop what you were doing, the answer is also obvious.

Ending another person's life is the only truly irreversible act a person can commit, and its wrongness or rightness is absolutely dependent on its necessity or otherwise.

And its 'necessity' is absolutely dependent on the needs of the person who intends to do the killing.

And the 'needs' of the person are absolutely dependent on the person's own perceptions.

If moral behaviour is defined as whatever ensures the greatest good for the greatest number, then your killing me is immoral, (because I'm innocent), but the cop killing you is moral, (provided I'm not also a killer who intends killing again).

But then, if your parents are standing there watching, will they want the cop to shoot you just to save me, even if they don't want to see me killed? To them, all killing is suddenly wrong.

I don't think the question is answerable in terms of rightness or wrongness. As long as we are still alive, we will declare that killing us is the wrong thing to do, and we couldn't care less if that is a view shared by the many or not.

[Time]

Originally Posted by Plato

However, morality is a stupid construct that attempts to make objective generalisations about how a human should behave. It doesn't work, as evidenced by the thousands of years of failure that started with Socrates and followed through to Kant.

I wouldn't call morality "stupid". If you want to discredit it, you could choose a more accurate term than that. Morality is a set of agreed constraints which work to address the fundamental wants of humanity - survival and freedom from pain. No particular individual "invented" morality. And even if you could trace some moral precepts to such an individual, it would take a certain arrogance to declare that man "stupid".

As for your "proof" that morality "doesn't work", (what does that mean really?), you refer us to Socrates and Kant. I have to ask why you think referring to philosophers supports your contention.

Philosophers now realise that morality is a farce. It is widely conceded.

Oh yes, everybody knows that...... Please, surely on a forum for allegedly intelligent people, that hoary old bit of blather has no place!

Now we're just waiting for society to catch up.

"We" are, are "we"? A bit self-aggrandizing there, Plato.

EDIT to make this relevant -- it's also been established that we perform best when we don't think. See Eckart Tolle. See most good books on Sports Psychology. See the works of Hubert Dreyfus. See Nietzsche. See Dostoyevsky.

Have you actually read those works that you recommend? We perform best when we don't think consciously about the act we're attempting, (as in sport), because we are then turning over the performance of the act to the subconscious mind, which can think better, quicker, and far more efficiently than the conscious, which is necessarily burdened with Maintenance.

[ar81]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

The thread "is murder wrong" got closed. I originally took that question as "is killing wrong". What do you think?

Apparently the word murder has an ambiguous definition .. I don't fully understand it. Some difference there between "murder" and "killing". By killing here, I mean causing the end of a human life.

Seriously, what kind of question is that.
I might like to ask you. Is it wrong to kill YOU?

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by ar81

Seriously, what kind of question is that.
I might like to ask you. Is it wrong to kill YOU?

I answer no. I don't see killing me as wrong.

[newsbone]

Everything is either right or wrong; nothing is always right or forever wrong. Circumstances, knowledge or the lack of it, laws or the lack of it or time predetermines every thing to be either correct or incorrect. So killing is wrong but also right as it all depends on a variety of factors, situations and reasons.

[Daffy Duck]

Just a reminder: Plato banned himself, so I wouldn't expect a response from him.

[Plays With Life]

lol? Banned himself? Did he say why?

[Daffy Duck]

See here: How to Network With Busy People ? Part 2 (Blog)

[Time]

Originally Posted by Plato

Guys, let me know when you're bored of everything being safe and secure.

I'll be with the people stirring things up a bit.

I don't know you, but I'd say that being one of those people who "stir things up" is what makes you feel safe and secure.