More Ethics Questions (1 Viewer)

[9TH]

1. From "Moral Reasoning" by Victor Grassian:

"You are a prisoner in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard is about to hang your son who tried to escape and he wants you to pull the chair from underneath him. He says that if you don't, he will not only kill your son but some other innocent inmate as well. You don't have any doubt that he means what he says. What should you do?"

What would you do? This may of course differ from what you think you should do.

2. My scenario:

The same guard gives you a gun with one bullet. You're in a room with another prisoner, a stranger, who is tied up. In the next room, behind a bullletproof window, the guard has your child tied up and is holding a gun to his head. He says you must kill the stranger or he will kill your child. If you kill the stranger, your child will live. If you shoot yourself, he will kill them both. You have no reason to doubt his word.

Again - What would you do? What should you do?

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

You are a prisoner in a concentration camp. ... A sadistic guard is about to hang your son who tried to escape and he wants you to pull the chair from underneath him. What should you do?

My son will die anyway. I pull the chair and make sure my son's neck breaks cleanly. I make damned certain that, no matter what the consequences are, that guard dies at my hand, and he dies hard.

The same guard gives you a gun with one bullet. He says you must kill the stranger or he will kill your child.

I offer to take the stranger's last words to his family, if I can. Then I kill him.

 

[Jerry]

1. From "Moral Reasoning" by Victor Grassian:

"You are a prisoner in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard is about to hang your son who tried to escape and he wants you to pull the chair from underneath him. He says that if you don't, he will not only kill your son but some other innocent inmate as well. You don't have any doubt that he means what he says. What should you do?"

What would you do? This may of course differ from what you think you should do?

I would not cooperate, the 3 of us will meet in heaven and be free from that hell.

2. My scenario:

The same guard gives you a gun with one bullet. You're in a room with another prisoner, a stranger, who is tied up. In the next room, behind a bullletproof window, the guard has your child tied up and is holding a gun to his head. He says you must kill the stranger or he will kill your child. If you kill the stranger, your child will live. If you shoot yourself, he will kill them both. You have no reason to doubt his word.

Again - What would you do? What should you do?

I would not cooperate, the 3 of us will meet in heaven and be free from that hell.

 

[naseuy]

1) I'd pull the chair.


2) If the option of shooting the guard is out of the question, there isn't any reason to believe that the guard wouldn't kill the son anyways. I'd shoot the prisoner.

 

[Kandahar]

1. From "Moral Reasoning" by Victor Grassian:

"You are a prisoner in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard is about to hang your son who tried to escape and he wants you to pull the chair from underneath him. He says that if you don't, he will not only kill your son but some other innocent inmate as well. You don't have any doubt that he means what he says. What should you do?"

What would you do? This may of course differ from what you think you should do.

Tell the guard to go **** himself.

2. My scenario:

The same guard gives you a gun with one bullet. You're in a room with another prisoner, a stranger, who is tied up. In the next room, behind a bullletproof window, the guard has your child tied up and is holding a gun to his head. He says you must kill the stranger or he will kill your child. If you kill the stranger, your child will live. If you shoot yourself, he will kill them both. You have no reason to doubt his word.

Again - What would you do? What should you do?

Shoot the prisoner.

 

[talloulou]

Tell the guard to go **** himself.
I agree completely!


Shoot the prisoner.

Me too. Sucks but not much I wouldn't do to save my child.

 

[Monkey Mind]

1. From "Moral Reasoning" by Victor Grassian:

"You are a prisoner in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard is about to hang your son who tried to escape and he wants you to pull the chair from underneath him. He says that if you don't, he will not only kill your son but some other innocent inmate as well. You don't have any doubt that he means what he says. What should you do?"

What would you do? This may of course differ from what you think you should do.

I'd attack the guard. If I am to die, let me die trying to free my son. If my son is to die, let him die knowing I did everything I could to free him.

2. My scenario:

The same guard gives you a gun with one bullet. You're in a room with another prisoner, a stranger, who is tied up. In the next room, behind a bullletproof window, the guard has your child tied up and is holding a gun to his head. He says you must kill the stranger or he will kill your child. If you kill the stranger, your child will live. If you shoot yourself, he will kill them both. You have no reason to doubt his word.

Again - What would you do? What should you do?

It's a concentration camp. The three of us are all as good as dead. I do not trust what the guard says, nor do I believe my son or I will be spared if I follow the guard's orders. I would not do as the guard commanded. After he shoots my son, he's going to have to come back into the room to get me. When he does, I will be waiting for him with the loaded gun.

 

[Cathurian]

I'd pull the chair. Less total death that way.

I would REFUSE to shoot the prisoner. Think about it guys -- If you refuse to shoot the prisoner, the same amount of people (one) will die as if you had. But if you don't shoot then you won't have blood on your hands, the guard will.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Think about it guys -- If you refuse to shoot the prisoner, the same amount of people (one) will die as if you had.

But one of the people who could die is your son. That should make all the difference.

 

[Billo_Really]

How's this one:

Your a moderator asked to vote on a perm-ban issue regarding someone you can't stand who is accused of malicious attacks against someone you really like. You have personal knowledge no one else has that indicates the person you hate had compelling reasons for reacting the way he/she did that would show the posts were not of a malicious nature, but the result of a personal thing between the two members. Which involved the person you "like" doing a very vicious and uncalled for action towards the person you "hate."

Do you:

1. Say nothing and show your allegence to your friend
2. Say nothing and abstain from voting
3. Come forth with this information and take the chance of a good friendship ending
4. Come forth with this information, abstain from voting and let the chips fall where they may
5. Do your duty as prescribed in the capacity of your position
6. Barter between the two to see whose willing to pay more for your silence

Or do what Bush would do and ban someone totally unrelated to this issue.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Present the information privately to the moderators-- under terms of strict confidentiality between them. Then, vote as your duty demands; in this case, it seems like the proper course is to vote against perma-banning, though it's worth noting that provocation is not an excuse.

 

[Billo_Really]

This one is more basic and common:

Have you ever admitted to yourself or others that you were wrong about an issue you were so sure was the opposite?

If you have never done that, you are not an ethical person at all!

 

[FallingPianos]

1. From "Moral Reasoning" by Victor Grassian:

"You are a prisoner in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard is about to hang your son who tried to escape and he wants you to pull the chair from underneath him. He says that if you don't, he will not only kill your son but some other innocent inmate as well. You don't have any doubt that he means what he says. What should you do?"

What would you do? This may of course differ from what you think you should do.

if possible, i'd do what my son wants me to do. If I have no way of knowing what my son would want, i'd try to kill the guard. everyone might end up dead in the end, but my son would at least know I fought to defend him.

2. My scenario:

The same guard gives you a gun with one bullet. You're in a room with another prisoner, a stranger, who is tied up. In the next room, behind a bullletproof window, the guard has your child tied up and is holding a gun to his head. He says you must kill the stranger or he will kill your child. If you kill the stranger, your child will live. If you shoot yourself, he will kill them both. You have no reason to doubt his word.

Again - What would you do? What should you do?

the stranger will die whether I shoot him or not. i'd shoot him.

 

[Dogger807]

1) My son would die only after I was dead first. An animal is most dangerous when cornered without hope.

2) I'd close my eyes and intentionally miss the prisoner this is an unforeseen twist in the scenario which may lead to an opportunity to exploit. More likely it would lead to all our deaths, but the no win options from above....

 

[Spartacus FPV]

I would not cooperate, the 3 of us will meet in heaven and be free from that hell.

Then in each instance one more life will have been taken then had to have been, what if this life didnt believe in your heaven?