- #1
Dissident Dan
- 238
- 2
Let's say that there are innocent people who are going to die if you don't do anything. You can save them, but it requires the killing of an innocent person. Is this ethically good or acceptable?
Now let's say that there is a terrorist holding people captive. If you don't rescue them, they will die. You can rescue them, but it requires killing the terrorist. Is this ethically good or acceptable?
Would your answer be the same under the belief of "free will" and under the belief of determinism? If yes, what would be different?
(In the above, you can replace die/killing with suffer severely/cause severe suffering...would that change your answers?)
Now let's say that there is a terrorist holding people captive. If you don't rescue them, they will die. You can rescue them, but it requires killing the terrorist. Is this ethically good or acceptable?
Would your answer be the same under the belief of "free will" and under the belief of determinism? If yes, what would be different?
(In the above, you can replace die/killing with suffer severely/cause severe suffering...would that change your answers?)