Morality #1

[Ted-Easton]

A band of guerillas have lined up 50 hostages, bound hand and foot, gagged, and their leader has just taken you.
You are offered a chance at freedom. Either you can shoot one hostage of your choice, or they will shoot all 50 hostages plus yourself.
What do you do?

(My minister posed me this problem years ago.)

[Spike-J-Wolfwood]

I would do it. One person or all plus me? I don’t believe that I have an immortal soul that would suffer the consequence of this action so the only thing I would have to deal with is guilt. I think after a while I could forgive myself. Besides, if there was a god I just saved 49 lives. I think that would be kept in consideration. However I don’t think that it is even a factor.

[MarijuanaClock]

Things I would do:

1) Shoot a hostage, simply, they're going to die anyway.

2)Take the gun and shoot the leader. If I'm going to die I might as well take my enemy out with me.

Things I would not do:

1) Just be killed

[Spike-J-Wolfwood]

Oh wait, you didn't say that they would be saved. Well then, I still stand by what I said. Besides, I can probably lead forces to their position. I may be worth more to the hostages alive

[kremlorn]

Shoot a hostage. Better to lose one than to lose all. I would pick someone I did not know that way I wont regret it too much. Cold, but going by a utilitarianists system, its the best option.

[Spike-J-Wolfwood]

You can also pick the guy that's been bitchin' the whole trip. That'll teach him to STFU!

[Ted-Easton]

Please, only use the options I provided. And the bitchy guy died in the quicksand, along with "drink lots of water" the fat black lady.

[Ted-Easton]

And to throw a religious slant on it,

the obvious thing would be shooting the one person would be murder. You soul is damned, eternal pain, etc.

But, what if you sacrifice your own SOUL to save the lives of 49 people? You send one person to God, and allow 49 others to continue living, and you make an even more impressive sacrifice than "The Supreme Sacrifice". You not only sacrifice your life to save others, but your immortal soul.

[Alakazam]

If a minister posed this question to you...then a Christian answer would probably be:

Sacrifice yourself for the 50, because any good Christian is saved and you would go to Heaven.

[JMHX]

I'd just wait until Delta Force came through.

[implodinggoat]

If terrorists chucked me an AK I'd shoot one in a second to save my own ass.

However terrorists tend to not be the most honorable people on the face of the planet so I think I would probably just take the gun yell "Say Hello to my little friend!" and attempt to take down as many terrorists as I could as I went down in a blaze of glory....I'd make sure to leave one alive though so they could go back and tell their terrorist friends about that badass crazy mother fucker who killed their leader and friends.

[rezgwu]

I would rather kill one person gthan get 51 people killed.

[TheEvilOne]

Is shooting myself an option?

[Slizor]

I don't think eeryone has got the idea of the moral question behind this *looks at Mr I Goat*.

I would shoot the one person, it's logical that if you value you life (which most people who are alive do) then you would prefer more life, which option gives more life, shooting one yourself.

I actually did a whole load of these in philosophy, including this one, I'll dig out my folder in a bit.

[firehead]

Actually, someone pure would sacrifice himself for the sake of everyone.
A normal dude would kill someone from the group.
And an a$$hole would kill everyone.

[Alakazam]

At 2/19/03 11:01 AM, Slizor wrote:

I would shoot the one person, it's logical that if you value you life (which most people who are alive do) then you would prefer more life, which option gives more life, shooting one yourself. :

You should refrain from even saying the word 'logic' as you abuse it far too often.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt, you are aware that your entire response is a big *what if*:

If you value your life...

If a person values life in general; instead of being selfish, he would 'logically' be altruistic and kill himself. A selfless person would rather die than sacrificing their own moral obligations by just picking one person out of the fifty. Who does he pick, and why? Could he live with himself afterwards? Of course if he did kill one of the fifty, then he is not better than the geurillas, is that what he wants?

Ahh, and so demonstrates the uselessness of philosophy.

[TheEvilOne]

A little more on shooting yourself:

Looking at it from a Christian standpoint, shooting yourself may be the best option. God probably wouldn't want everyone to die, but He would probably prefer that you sacrifice yourself rather than kill another man to save yourself. If you're an atheist, I can see where you're coming from about killing another to save yourself if you don't believe in eternal repurcussions, though I personally would find it difficult to live with myself. If killing oneself is an option, it is probably the best option, regardless of whether or not you believe in an afterlife.

Now here's another question: what if the terrorists said they would kill the others if you killed yourself?

[Slizor]

How is it that Alakazam comes up on every topic that i post in?

I would shoot the one person, it's logical that if you value you life (which most people who are alive do) then you would prefer more life, which option gives more life, shooting one yourself. :

You should refrain from even saying the word 'logic' as you abuse it far too often.

I abuse it? What about you Mr Circular Reasoning Man?

Giving you the benefit of the doubt, you are aware that your entire response is a big *what if*:

If you value your life...

Most people alive value their life. Those that do not value their life tend to die quickly.

If a person values life in general; instead of being selfish

Not valuing life does not make you selfish.

he would 'logically' be altruistic and kill himself.

You can value life, but not be altruistic.

A selfless person would rather die than sacrificing their own moral obligations

Their own moral obligations? Not all moral systems are rule based.

by just picking one person out of the fifty. Who does he pick, and why? Could he live with himself afterwards?

Pointless questions.

Of course if he did kill one of the fifty, then he is not better than the geurillas

What? He is being forced to kill one of the hostages (Ted, does this include himself?) It is a moral action which has no "good" solution, unless of course you kill yourself, which I wouldn't exactly call a good solution.

It he doesn't shoot someone, then he and everyone else dies. He had the chance to stop the murders, but he didn't. (I wouldn't exactly call that moral.)

If he shoots one person, then he has saved himself and the rest.

If he shoots himself, he has saved everyone else, but he is dead.

Now, what option would you choose?

[Ted-Easton]

There are 50 hostages, PLUS yourself.

And shooting yourself is NOT an option.
I listed all options.

[Nevah73]

But if you kill one person, do the 49 others go free?

If so, I'd kill the most annoying person in the group, or if someone volunteered I'd kill them.

If not, I'd still kill the most annoying person in the group. That way it's 50 deaths vs. 51 deaths, which would allow for the least amount of lost life, and would also rid the world of an annoying person.

[implodinggoat]

At 2/19/03 11:01 AM, Slizor wrote: I don't think eeryone has got the idea of the moral question behind this *looks at Mr I Goat*.

I got the point of the post I just have a rather unique sense of morality.

You see in general I feel that the world is over populated and killing off a few religous fanatics who are likely murderers wouldn't be a huge loss and could potentialy save the lives of others they might attempt to kill later.

As for the issue of killing another hostage to save myself I would most likely do it as I value my life above almost anyones.

[JMHX]

I got the point of the post I just have a rather unique sense of morality.

Isn't that the joy of free thought? It makes everything so interesting!