|
A (horrible) Question of Ethics | by Illiad | 2008-04-28 08:51:02 |
|
*both* decisions are the same. | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 09:13:12 |
|
They're not the same | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 09:16:05 |
|
I disagree. | by Pic | 2008-04-28 09:29:09 |
|
"Certainty that either..." | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 09:42:41 |
|
"ethics isn't about numbers or probability." | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 10:18:05 |
|
What do you mean by | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 10:19:56 |
| You're in the game of probabilty |
by perlcat45 |
2008-04-28 10:28:13 |
because it is human life you are talking about. Either the Smith family loves you and Jones hates you, or Jones loves you and Smith hates you. That is one of the few external factors that can be imputed -- and if you've ever lost a child, or been in a situation where their life hangs by a thread, the knowledge that your neighbors' kid will live if yours dies is cold comfort, and the knowledge is down there at a visceral layer. Trust me, at that point, a guarantee that one will live and the other will die isn't nearly as attractive.
If the babies were not human, then the equation is different. But they wouldn't be babies, then.
|
|
[ Reply ] |
|
I don't follow | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 10:33:05 |
|
Thank $deity you aren't my doctor.(n/t) | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 10:36:26 |
|
Whether a decision is right or wrong | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 10:41:31 |
|
I do believe Solomon answered that qn | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 10:49:06 |
|
I believe that the question Solomon answered | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 10:56:24 |
|
That is a highly unfair question to ask parents. | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 10:48:17 |
|
You don't ask them. | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 10:53:22 |
|
How will explain the situation change it? | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 10:55:48 |
|
Again, the situation is that: | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 11:07:28 |
|
What, exactly, is the "RNG"? | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 11:22:38 |
|
Play nethack sometime | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 11:33:37 |
|
What random number generator? | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 12:00:53 |
|
omnipotent is as omnipotent does | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 12:03:43 |
|
True; | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 12:08:23 |
|
I still don't see how it was not in your hands (n/ (n/t) | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 10:57:11 |
|
Responses: | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 11:36:35 |
|
In real life, you're correct | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 11:42:20 |
|
I answered elsewhere in the thread: | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 13:43:14 |
|
I read that, | by MatthewDBA | 2008-04-28 14:01:37 |
|
I disagree | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 11:59:11 |
|
Matter of trust. | by perlcat45 | 2008-04-28 13:08:59 |
|
Which is exactly why it's unfair to present the | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 13:16:38 |
|
I doubt I'll convince you, but... | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 13:40:47 |
|
but this isn't that situation. | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 13:51:01 |
|
But they do have different goals. | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 14:12:58 |
|
It's still just passing the buck. | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 14:15:40 |
|
Is it passing the buck... | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 14:22:11 |
|
Yes, it is. | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 14:53:58 |
|
I fear I'm repeating myself. | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 15:03:54 |
|
Why? | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 15:06:06 |
|
But that *isn't* the only difference. | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 15:09:11 |
|
And who in their right mind | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 15:25:34 |
|
That isn't the scenario described in the OP. | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 15:30:46 |
|
I guess we're going to have to disagree on that :) (n/t) | by subbywan | 2008-04-28 15:39:41 |
|
I guess so. | by Nath3 | 2008-04-28 15:52:27 |
