07-02-2004 00:17									#121
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by GePap Well, the thing is we know from the start she is hell bent of wipping out the species- so why mar the last few days of Mankind with savage violence leading to the death of one of the few remianing human beings?

We don't know that. All we know is that she doesn't want to have sex with the men.

	07-02-2004 00:19									#122
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Again, you've not given any coherent reason why the survival of the human race is so important in this instance that it permits rape/murder. I'm assuming you don't approve of such things normally, so I'd like to get a consistent argument.

We don't consider killing someone 'normal' either, but we'll do it in times of war or for SELF-PRESERVATION. I would like to think that the above scenarios aren't or will never be 'normal'.

	07-02-2004 00:19									#123
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: And does that survival apply in other situations, for instance, if the woman wasn't pregnant, just the only one left and perfectly fertile, but refused to breed with the remaining men. Would it be okay to rape her and force her to carry a child to term for the sake of species survival?

No. First of all, if God wants the species to perpetuate, then he will encourage the woman to have another child.

Secondly, you have this whole promise of a new heaven and a new Earth. We will receive these gifts at the time of the Second Coming, which everything that we know of now will fade away. Acts like raping the woman will remain with us even after we die, while the preservation of the speices will be meaningless.

	07-02-2004 00:21									#124
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by SlowwHand Who knows? If you paid attention, Curt cared so much, he asked the question then left.

Can't make an answer without supervision, can't we?

quote: Originally posted by SlowwHand Another in a long line of troll threads, no matter his disclaimer.

Whatever.

The arch-troll Slow calling me a troll?

That's irony personified.

	07-02-2004 00:22									#125
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

And golly-gosh!

This thread got massive real quick!
I have to take my hat off to the posters here!

Now, I have to go through and read it all!

	07-02-2004 00:25									#126
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I disagree, Agathon.

First, I disagree that it's wrong to say "the guerilla captain might kill everyone anyway," because that seems to me a very reasonable objection to make. Someone who hands you a gun and tells you to pick someone to die is the type who might then just laugh at you and gun you all down anyway. But ok, what if that's not an issue (so I TRUST this madman)...

If I give into this sick ****, and shoot a fellow hostage (or myself) to save the rest, he WINS. And I don't want him to win. I want him to lose badly, and all others who come after to lose badly too. Hence shooting him, resulting in the rest of his guerrila types shooting me and the rest of the hostages, killing us all. Is that possibly seflish? Yes, it might just be. But it ain't religious.

"Head like a hole. Black as your soul. I'd rather die, than give you control!"



-Arrian

	07-02-2004 00:25									#127
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Agathon Boris' case introduces an unnecessary complication, since it requires one to resolve the vexed question of whether the rights or welfare of future human beings must be taken into account.

My complication isn't unnecessary, because one of the core reasons that some religionists use to claim abortion is murder is that if the fetus isn't human, it will BE human. Potential humanity is important to them. So this dilemma asks them not only to choose between allowing an abortion to save the mother or forcing the mother to die to save the fetus, but also to consider the potential future of the human race.

	07-02-2004 00:26									#128
	Tired of ads?

Just copied and saved Agathon's response. Quite excellent.

	07-02-2004 00:27									#129
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Agathon:

I though you were a deontological rights based virtue ethicist rather than a slimy utilitarian.

What would you say to a reesponse like this? "Let the ten people go. I offer myself in their stead."

	07-02-2004 00:28									#130
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Theben We don't consider killing someone 'normal' either, but we'll do it in times of war or for SELF-PRESERVATION. I would like to think that the above scenarios aren't or will never be 'normal'.

Agreed, but in this instance the only person worrying about self-preservation is the woman who doesn't want to die. None of the men are in danger of dying. It's not about preserving themselves.

I just can't fathom killing a woman for the benefit of people who don't even exist yet and that you aren't certain will ever exist.

	07-02-2004 00:28									#131
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Are you one of the ten, and thus shooting yourself to save the other nine is an option? Or did I read it too fast?

-Arrian

	07-02-2004 00:29									#132
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov My complication isn't unnecessary, because one of the core reasons that some religionists use to claim abortion is murder is that if the fetus isn't human, it will BE human. Potential humanity is important to them. So this dilemma asks them not only to choose between allowing an abortion to save the mother or forcing the mother to die to save the fetus, but also to consider the potential future of the human race.

OK - I apologize for not being clearer.

Your case relies on us sorting out the question of the value of future human lives and what role that should play (if any) in our moral decision making. But that is a separate issue from whether or not it is sometimes right to break moral rules to prevent more egregious cases of rule breaking. That's an additional question your case needs to solve.

	07-02-2004 00:29									#133
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Agathon: thumbs up on the explanation of why are rights-based theories wrong, but I am not very sure about their connection to religion.

Ben: wtf? I find something very disturbing about people who believe in god after a holocaust, esp. a nuclear one.

	07-02-2004 00:30									#134
	Remove this text

Why would a nuclear holocaust shake people's faith in God, when all the rest of human history hasn't been able to do it?

-Arrian

	07-02-2004 00:31									#135
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi No. First of all, if God wants the species to perpetuate, then he will encourage the woman to have another child. Secondly, you have this whole promise of a new heaven and a new Earth. We will receive these gifts at the time of the Second Coming, which everything that we know of now will fade away. Acts like raping the woman will remain with us even after we die, while the preservation of the speices will be meaningless.

That's a reasonable position for a religionist, certainly. But that question was more for Az specifically than for the religionists.

I'm still astonished that any non-believer would either force the woman to die or rape her to breed.

	07-02-2004 00:31									#136
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: than a slimy utilitarian.

Hey!!!!

	07-02-2004 00:33									#137
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Arrian Are you one of the ten, and thus shooting yourself to save the other nine is an option? Or did I read it too fast? -Arrian

No - you aren't. The question is "is it alright to do bad things to lessen the overall amount of bad in the world?"

But some people say, "No, the ends don't justify the means. You cannot violate anyone's rights for the greater good."

But then they can be asked, "is it right to break moral rules yourself to ensure that less rules are broken overall?"

The only way that rights based theories can reject the idea of a greater good, is by saying that it doesn't matter whether more or less rights are violated, as long as you don't violate them.

But that really requires some sort of religious view to support it.

	07-02-2004 00:35									#138
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: because one of the core reasons that some religionists use to claim abortion is murder is that if the fetus isn't human, it will BE human. Potential humanity is important to them.

Eh?

What part of the statement, "human life begins at conception" says that the fetus is not already a human person?

quote: I find something very disturbing about people who believe in god after a holocaust, esp. a nuclear one.

Why so? We have had a massive Holocaust, yet Jews do not forsake their Creator. Who is to blame for a nuclear catastrope, God or man?

	07-02-2004 00:37									#139
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Eh? What part of the statement, "human life begins at conception" says that the fetus is not already a human person?

I don't recall saying that was your belief, but certainly is a common one among religious people. Perhaps you shouldn't be so arrogant as to assume any reference to religious people refers solely to you and your belief system?

	07-02-2004 00:38									#140
	Increase Your PM Length

Azazel. Think about what it is that makes the violating of rights a bad thing, if it isn't the actual effect on the victim. Because if it is the effect, then we have to minimize the number of bad effects.

If it isn't the effect on the victim, it must be something to do with the perpetrator doing it himself. That only makes sense to me, if only clean consciences matter and the effects on the victims don't. A religious view supplies this: what happens to victims in this world doesn't really matter, because all that matters is that each individual keep his conscience as clean as he can by following God's law. People that do that are candidates for heaven, people that don't are candidates for hell. As long as I don't break God's rules, I am fine. If others break them, that is between them and God.

	07-02-2004 00:39									#141
	Get a bigger avatar today!

My basic problem with "the good of the many outweights the good of they few, or the one" is this:

We humans make an awful lot of mistakes. If we actually believed as you do, that doing "bad things" for "the good of the many" was ok, that leads down a road to doing all sorts of bad things that are then justified by "well, it was for the common good!" Even if it was unclear that it really was for the common good.

The party has decided that you must die for the good of humanity! But perhaps 10 yrs down the road you stumbled upon some sort of discovery that actually benifitted humanity.

My point is that we aren't really all that good at predicting the effects of our actions in the future. As such, allowing the "good of the many" to always trump the "good of the few or the one" stikes me as a TERRIBLE idea, because it will be misused, and of course deliberately abused.

-Arrian

	07-02-2004 00:40									#142
	Put an end to popups!

Agathon:

Gotcha.

You agree with us, right?

quote: I'm still astonished that any non-believer would either force the woman to die or rape her to breed.

Apparently, you've been living a sheltered life.

	07-02-2004 00:44									#143
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: but certainly is a common one among religious people.

I challenge this assumption. Phrasing the statement in this way implies that it is due to their religious teachings that they take on theis view. This is most certainly not the case, with their churches stating the precise opposite. If they choose to reject their own church, then their beliefs arise from the world, and not their faith.

	07-02-2004 00:46									#144
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Arrian My basic problem with "the good of the many outweights the good of they few, or the one" is this: We humans make an awful lot of mistakes. If we actually believed as you do, that doing "bad things" for "the good of the many" was ok, that leads down a road to doing all sorts of bad things that are then justified by "well, it was for the common good!" Even if it was unclear that it really was for the common good. The party has decided that you must die for the good of humanity! But perhaps 10 yrs down the road you stumbled upon some sort of discovery that actually benifitted humanity. My point is that we aren't really all that good at predicting the effects of our actions in the future. As such, allowing the "good of the many" to always trump the "good of the few or the one" stikes me as a TERRIBLE idea, because it will be misused, and of course deliberately abused. -Arrian

I addressed that question. We do make mistakes because we are not infallible. But we should always act to the best of our knowledge. If we say we shouldn't act unless we are certain, we'd never do anything.

	07-02-2004 00:46									#145
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Theben We don't know that. All we know is that she doesn't want to have sex with the men.

Same thing. I doubt she is unaware of the implications of not having sex.

	07-02-2004 00:47									#146
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Azazel Gotcha. You agree with us, right?

I'm not sure. I disagree with the religious people. I think that the only source of value is human welfare, but I have specific ideas about what this is. It's not pleasure or preference satisfaction, but a state of flourishing in accordance with our nature.

	07-02-2004 00:51									#147
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, that's awfully vague, isn't it?

How about this particular case?

	07-02-2004 00:52									#148
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: I addressed that question. We do make mistakes because we are not infallible. But we should always act to the best of our knowledge. If we say we shouldn't act unless we are certain, we'd never do anything.

I'm not saying we should never act, but rather that we should be very careful about what we justify in the name of the "common good" (or any good, for that matter). Death, which is what we're discussing in this shoot the hostage example, is irrevocable.

-Arrian

	07-02-2004 00:52									#149
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov I'm still astonished that any non-believer would either force the woman to die...

No, b/c the one child most likely will not be enough to save humanity, assuming it's even female.

quote: or rape her to breed.

Lesser of two evils. I'd say the same thing if it was one man and a community of women, and the man didn't want to breed.

This also assumes of course that modern medicine isn't available. Otherwise, if a trained specialist is available and the equipment available we could extract the woman's eggs and the men could fertilize them. End of dilemma.

	07-02-2004 00:54									#150
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: This also assumes of course that modern medicine isn't available. Otherwise, if a trained specialist is available and the equipment available we could extract the woman's eggs and the men could fertilize them. End of dilemma.

And then what? grow them inside the male body like in that arnie movie?

quote: No, b/c the one child most likely will not be enough to save humanity, assuming it's even female.

I still say you have to give it a shot.