MORAL DILEMMA

Author: bibliobibulimaniac ,

Posts

Total: 32
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,931
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
I don't see any moral difference, both are sending people to die for no apparent reason to benefit anything other than their own self interest. Are both individuals having these Jews killed in the same place and in the same manor? 
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 3,542
3
5
9
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
5
9
--> @zedvictor4
And so goes the argument between a moral objectivist and a moral relativist.

Anyway, if you were the "onlooker" as you mentioned above in Post #3, would you view one or the other as worse?
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 8,120
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Mharman
Blimey, it's been two months.

Ummmm

The other would seem to have the worse moral dilemma.



Random thought

I often wonder how some people are able to work in an abattoir, day after day.
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 3,542
3
5
9
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
5
9
--> @zedvictor4
The other would seem to have the worse moral dilemma.
Lol. Which one is "the other?"
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 19
Posts: 8,120
3
3
4
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
4
--> @Mharman
The one referred to as "the other individual".

There were only two to choose from.

The zealot and the other.

Call them Jeff and Britney if you like.

9 days later

Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,256
4
3
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
3
10
--> @bibliobibulimaniac

Caused me to remember this thread,
Of the situation, I say again, I don't think it matters one's intention,
The situation is 'still bad.

Of the individuals however,
Their intentions would matter I suppose,
As a person who 'thought their act was right, might be convinced otherwise,
As a person who thought their act was wrong, might be difficult to trust.

Then again,
Not always easy to convince fanatics.

While people who know their action are wrong,
Might be trusted by authoritarians,
That the individual will act in their own interest, and do what the authority 'wants done. Even be it conventionally evil.

. . .

A fanatic 'might be punished differently, as they might learn if convinced,

While the individual acting in their own interest, might require punishment and expect to be held accountable, to change.

They aren't punished differently because one is 'worse,
But because their motivations are 'different.
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 110
Posts: 3,175
4
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
4
8
11
--> @bibliobibulimaniac
Responding to #1:

The second one, because given what they are, the reason why the second person sent the Jews to die was not due to race, but for other reasons, such as crime.

Given that the first one thinks jews are intrinsically sinful or something, the quality on average by A would be the average Jewish person as he discriminates against every Jew. The second one would have sent people on average with less quality, including for example such as evil capitalists, criminals, etc. Unless the problem isn't clear, there is no reason why B would send innocent Jewish citizens to die, but A obviously could and would.