Is killing (humans) wrong?

[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.

[chrisrushton]

yes, killing humans is wrong.

[Orecle]

whats your precise definition of wrong?


or is it a free for all, like peoples definition of success

Do you beleive in the concept of right and wrong

[Plato]

I reject the question.

Funny thing to think about though: we're all descended from killers.

[Plays With Life]

Some spice: Is killing to prevent killing also wrong?

About the definition of wrong - I don't have one.

On the matter of question rejection Can you elaborate on why?

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

On the matter of question rejection Can you elaborate on why?

Not really. It just doesn't make sense.

If you forced me though I'd say the biggest problem is it presupposes "killing" to be a discrete entity. Not to mention the existence of objective truth and objective morality.

It also demands a "Socratic" approach to decision making, which is to Hum and Har about the why's and wherefore's rather than trusting our good instincts to guide us. If you try to think about how to catch a ball you drop it.

Again though, I prefer to say I reject the question. The key doesn't fit the lock.

[ssandra]

I think killing is wrong under any circumstance, but sometimes you have no choice (when your life or that of others is in danger)

[Plato]

Originally Posted by ssandra

I think killing is wrong under any circumstance, but sometimes you have no choice (when your life or that of others is in danger)

This is a bad joke. I want to laugh but I'm closer to crying.

Do I need to say why? Is this a forum for smart people?

[Orecle]

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.

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

Some spice: Is killing to prevent killing also wrong?

About the definition of wrong - I don't have one.

On the matter of question rejection Can you elaborate on why?

if you dont have a definition for wrong, how would you recognise when it is occuring.

in general what value judgement do you place on the concept of wrong? what would need to happen for you to class a behaivour as wrong? for instance if you saw 3 youths mug an old lady, would thatbe wrong and what specifically by your standards makes it wrong

what is your understanding of the universal concept of right and wrong and do you agree with it?

if you do? do you have differing opinions from society as to what specifically is wrong ie murder? theft in times of extreme hardship?

so why did you start a thread with a question you can never get an answer to, since you have no measure as to whether the answer is justified

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by Plato

This is a bad joke. I want to laugh but I'm closer to crying.

Do I need to say why? Is this a forum for smart people?

Well, since I am apparently dumb.. could you explain to me why my opinion is a bad joke?

[Orecle]

Originally Posted by ssandra

I think killing is wrong under any circumstance, but sometimes you have no choice (when your life or that of others is in danger)

how can you HAVE to do wrong? if you have to do it, is it wrong? if breathing was declared wrong, would you agree that it was wrong?

[Plato]

Originally Posted by ssandra

Well, since I am apparently dumb.. could you explain to me why my opinion is a bad joke?

Most people have convinced themselves they are "good." It would be unbearable to think otherwise. They try to hide their darker impulses. They hide from themselves the knowledge that their morals and civilized propriety will be dropped at the first sign of trouble.

People do bad things (by their own standards, not mine) and then employ selective memory. They can't continue their self righteous act knowing they are no better, can they.

Now... The bad joke part. You have stated the truth most people try to hide from themselves (because it totally undermines their identity) and you haven't even noticed.

The sinners are casting stones in blissful ignorance.

[aelle]

I didn't respond to the "murder" thread because murder is a slanted term that doesn't allow an open discussion.
I don't believe killing a human is necessarily unethical. I do believe that it is unethical in most cases, and so is killing any other sentient animals.
My ethics are defined by the importance of consent of those who can consent, and the importance of the well being of those who are sentient but cannot express consent.

Putting an end to the sufferings of a person who fully consents to the euthanasia is definitely ethical in my book.

Killing a human being that is not yet sentient (embryo, early fetus) has no ethical impact in itself - the issue lies elsewhere, like what other beings this death affects.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by Orecle

if you dont have a definition for wrong, how would you recognise when it is occuring.

in general what value judgement do you place on the concept of wrong? what would need to happen for you to class a behaivour as wrong? for instance if you saw 3 youths mug an old lady, would thatbe wrong and what specifically by your standards makes it wrong

what is your understanding of the universal concept of right and wrong and do you agree with it?

if you do? do you have differing opinions from society as to what specifically is wrong ie murder? theft in times of extreme hardship?

so why did you start a thread with a question you can never get an answer to, since you have no measure as to whether the answer is justified

Er .. this first sentence sounds odd to me, though I can't say why exactly. I don't make any attempt to recognize wrong, so I don't need a definition. I don't class any behaviour as wrong (or right, while the subject is up). I understand right/wrong as, not a universal concept (ie one every person holds), but a concept some people hold OF a universal classification things fit into. I started the thread because it interests me what people think about the subject, not to find a universal answer to the question.

It interests me more to see the variety and contrast in different approaches (so please anyone share your thoughts ), than to debate the correctness / incorrectness of each approach. My motivation stems from that interest.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by aelle

I do believe that it is unethical in most cases, and so is killing any other sentient animals.

You know, animals that are bred to be slaughtered wouldn't even exist if they weren't going to be killed and eaten by humans.

Maybe they should count themselves lucky.

I'm just playing devil's advocate.

In (my) reality there is no morality, anything goes and ethical rules are crutches for people who can't trust their own intelligence (instinct).

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by Plato

Most people have convinced themselves they are "good." It would be unbearable to think otherwise. They try to hide their darker impulses. They hide from themselves the knowledge that their morals and civilized propriety will be dropped at the first sign of trouble.

How do you know they are not 'good'?

People do bad things (by their own standards, not mine) and then employ selective memory. They can't continue their self righteous act knowing they are no better, can they.

Guilty as charged... The point is to learn from one's behaviour.

Now... The bad joke part. You have stated the truth most people try to hide from themselves (because it totally undermines their identity) and you haven't even noticed.

The sinners are casting stones in blissful ignorance.

It's more about being unconscious. And becoming more and more conscious. The more consciousness, the less 'casting stones' etc.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by aelle

I didn't respond to the "murder" thread because murder is a slanted term that doesn't allow an open discussion.

Precisely what I found. It seems that murder means killing in a situation considered wrong.

So asking "is murder wrong?" amounts to asking "is [killing in a situation considered wrong] wrong?".

[Plato]

Originally Posted by spirit4711

How do you know they are not 'good'?

Because these morals are dropped at the first sign of trouble (as ssandra helpfully highlighted). Killing is wrong in any circumstance. But if you're life is threatened you'll kill. And why not?!

When push comes to shove we'll eat each other. "All's fair in love and war" is tantamount to an admittance that morality goes out of the window when high passions are involved.

Now it's my opinion that high passions are the natural state of a healthy human being. Love and war is a daily reality, not something so rare that a facade of morality can be held up to give meaning to life in the absence of really living.

[aelle]

Originally Posted by Plato

You know, animals that are bred to be slaughtered wouldn't even exist if they weren't going to be killed and eaten by humans.

Maybe they should count themselves lucky.

I'm just playing devil's advocate.

This kind of sounds like the justifications of an abusive parent who claims that because they "gave life" to a child they are free to treat this life however they see fit, don't you think? I am perfectly ok with animals not being bred and born to start with, if their life is going to be one of endless suffering followed by a premature death.

Originally Posted by Plato

In (my) reality there is no morality, anything goes and ethical rules are crutches for people who can't trust their own intelligence (instinct).

That's why I make the distinction between morals and ethics. Morals are outside, atitrary values handed down by your parents, your priest, your teacher or your government. Ethics are personal, conscious guidelines to lead a good life that are open to questioning and change. You may call that trusting your intelligence, sure.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by aelle

I am perfectly ok with animals not being bred and born to start with, if their life is going to be one of endless suffering followed by a premature death.

Who are you to judge! (devil's advocate)

That's why I make the distinction between morals and ethics. Morals are outside, atitrary values handed down by your parents, your priest, your teacher or your government. Ethics are personal, conscious guidelines to lead a good life that are open to questioning and change. You may call that trusting your intelligence, sure.

I am actually arguing against ethical rules (personal or otherwise). They are an obstruction to intelligence which operates far better on its own.

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by Plato

Because these morals are dropped at the first sign of trouble (as ssandra helpfully highlighted). Killing is wrong in any circumstance. But if you're life is threatened you'll kill. And why not?!

When push comes to shove we'll eat each other. "All's fair in love and war" is tantamount to an admittance that morality goes out of the window when high passions are involved.

Now it's my opinion that high passions are the natural state of a healthy human being. Love and war is a daily reality, not something so rare that a facade of morality can be held up to give meaning to life in the absence of really living.

I might be a naive person but I don't think there's any real warfare in my life, going on in a daily basis..

I tend to respect all people and plus I avoid pointless conflict in everyday life situations.

I can't say I've found myself in any life situations where I've had any desire to kill.. But recently on MSN messenger I had the most warlike thing that happened to me lately, a loser, tried abusing me, and I realised he wouldn't leave me alone if I said "whatever, I don't care", so I insulting him to the point where I knew he wouldn't be smart enough to come up with a comeback too.. and he finally left me alone. But that's about the extent of warfare in my life..

I'm starting to think that maybe sometimes war is something that happens in life, and I need to accept it... rather than hide and let it worry me

[brendannz]

Well, murder leads to;

1/ imprisonment,

and

2/ hurt for the persons families..

I guess neither of these things are good things..

[Beuford]

Here is the way I see it.

If a sinister character was standing on the street armed to the teeth shooting innocent people and was headed for a bus full of children, and I happened to be holding sufficient means to take him down, it would probably be justified to kill him.

If a shady figure stole some object off me I would not kill him.

If I was being stabbed and I had sufficient means to defend myself I would only injure to the extent that I stop getting injured.

I'm all for peace but I am also for not getting shot up or stabbed because I decided it was unethical to defend myself.

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by ssandra

I think killing is wrong under any circumstance, but sometimes you have no choice (when your life or that of others is in danger)

I don't think you're dumb,

but I think maybe you need to understand that most killers basically believe deep down that they are harmless well-meaning good hearted people like you are who are only trying to protect themselves from other people, which is the situation where you have no choice.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by brendannz

I tend to respect all people and plus I avoid pointless conflict in everyday life situations.

I used to feel the same.

Now I realise it's more disrespectful to treat people like delicate little flowers. It's offensive, and weakens everybody. And you know, keeping aggressive feelings locked up has another name: passive aggression.

[Remiel]

Are there consequences to killing? Yes, always. Does that make killing wrong? No, not as is stated. Killing is neither good nor bad, the intention behind it puts it into the appropriate categories. For example the Government has a responsibility to the people to protect Justice (don't get me started on how badly they are failing this), with that the government has the right to judge, and execute people for things such as Murder (serial killers, the worst of the worst, etc).

Self Defense is another such area in which killing is not wrong. If a gunman was to point a gun at your family, and you have the choice to kill him and save your family or not and watch your family die before your eyes, which would you chose?

[brendannz]

Originally Posted by Plato

I used to feel the same.

Now I realise it's more disrespectful to treat people like delicate little flowers. It's offensive, and weakens everybody. And you know, keeping aggressive feelings locked up has another name: passive aggression.

Yeah, I think of respect as treating other people how you'd like to be treated, and being treated like a delicate little flower, is not how many people would like to be treated.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by brendannz

Yeah, I think of respect as treating other people how you'd like to be treated, and being treated like a delicate little flower, is not how many people would like to be treated.

Nothing better than a worthy adversary.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by Plato

Now... The bad joke part. You have stated the truth most people try to hide from themselves (because it totally undermines their identity) and you haven't even noticed.

The sinners are casting stones in blissful ignorance.

Why would you assume I haven't noticed? Just because I know something is wrong does not mean that life does not force me to make a choice. Good is not always an option.

I don't judge anybody for killing other people. I understand that they have justified reasons, even if it is just for themselves. Still, the action of killing is wrong (in my opinion).

Originally Posted by brendannz

I don't think you're dumb,

but I think maybe you need to understand that most killers basically believe deep down that they are harmless well-meaning good hearted people like you are who are only trying to protect themselves from other people, which is the situation where you have no choice.

Like I said, I understand that there is always a reason for killing and for most people who kill, they feel justified by that reason. That does not make it right.

I believe killing is wrong. I also believe that standing by and letting other people get killed is wrong.
If I had to choose between the 2, do nothing and other people get killed, or do something and kill somebody, both my options would be wrong. There would be no right thing to do. I would have to choose and live with my choice.
That I would kill to protect my loved ones makes it justified, not right.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by ssandra

I don't judge anybody for killing other people. I understand that they have justified reasons, even if it is just for themselves. Still, the action of killing is wrong (in my opinion).

On the face of it this is the most contradictory, stupid thing I've ever read in my life.

On the other hand, there's something that tells me you're coming from a perspective I don't understand. "Wrong" means something different to you than it does to most people.

For most of us "wrong under any circumstance" means unjustified in any circumstance. Otherwise what's the point in calling it wrong? Having a motive is not the same thing as being justified.