• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Would YOU kill the baby?

Would YOU kill the baby?


  • Total voters
    61

Beargryllz

New member
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Messages
2,719
MBTI Type
INTP
Or by neglect, assuming a sane case of manslaughter. No doubt. It is impossible to fault the baby.

Essentially, this question has been asked and asked specifically of us infinite times and boils down to:

"do you do something morally wrong or bad to prevent an inevitable outcome that is considerably worse than the results of the immoral action?"

Probably everyone has some kind of tipping point. Do you kill a junkie to save the entire earth? Do you punch a child to save his life? Do you kill a doomed baby to save yourself and others?

I'd say yes to all of them.

It isn't just the doing, it is also the acceptance. From what I gather on this thread and others like it, many would condone the lesser evil, and many would act, but some that would condone it would not act, and some that would act would act only under certain circumstances. But that is the problem, when it does become your action to make, your evil to commit, the justification may become simpler or more difficult. Does the moral person act with thought or without thought? And is it acceptable to perform the act, the act of lesser evil, and maintain a clean conscience, or is there supposed to be a feeling of guilt for the lesser evil act as well?
 

Beargryllz

New member
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Messages
2,719
MBTI Type
INTP
The first part about jurisdictional differences is a distraction since the bulk of the membership understand what manslaughter means. Then terminating a baby who might or might not give the hiding place away should also be a waste of human resources.

A man carries a gold bar into a seemingly endless desert and finally drops it to continue his journey. Was that a waste of resources?
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
Or by neglect, assuming a sane case of manslaughter. No doubt. It is impossible to fault the baby.

Essentially, this question has been asked and asked specifically of us infinite times and boils down to:

"do you do something morally wrong or bad to prevent an inevitable outcome that is considerably worse than the results of the immoral action?"

Probably everyone has some kind of tipping point. Do you kill a convicted killer to save the entire earth? Do you punch a child to save his life? Do you kill a doomed baby to save yourself and others?

I'd say yes to all of them.
The bolded phrase is a subjective judgment. I consider killing an innocent baby worse than any possible outcome of it crying. As far as morality is concerned, if it came down to killing an adult, my response might be different depending on the situation.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
A man carries a gold bar into a seemingly endless desert and finally drops it to continue his journey. Was that a waste of resources?
The bolded word is important. No one can predict the future and all its possibilities.

And anyways, the wasted resource argument was yours not mine.
 

Beargryllz

New member
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Messages
2,719
MBTI Type
INTP
The bolded phrase is a subjective judgment. I consider killing an innocent baby worse than any possible outcome of it crying. As far as morality is concerned, if it came down to killing an adult, my response might be different depending on the situation.

Why would the sacrificial lamb being an adult make the decision any different? What about an adult that is unable to control their own actions, essentially taking on the exact role of the baby, but without the cuteness factor?
 

Beargryllz

New member
Joined
Jun 7, 2010
Messages
2,719
MBTI Type
INTP
The bolded word is important. No one can predict the future and all its possibilities.

And anyways, the wasted resource argument was yours not mine.

It became yours the moment you suggested the baby was a resource and not a liability. A gamble, a choice, we make them all the time. The future is a product of all of these, and we do the best we can. Does that render the moral dilemma solved?
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
Why would the sacrificial lamb being an adult make the decision any different? What about an adult that is unable to control their own actions, essentially taking on the exact role of the baby, but without the cuteness factor?
You ignored my very important caveat of "my response might be different depending on the situation".

Of the adults who are in control and have understanding, these I would kill if they refused to shut up.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
It became yours the moment you suggested the baby was a resource and not a liability. A gamble, a choice, we make them all the time. The future is a product of all of these, and we do the best we can. Does that render the moral dilemma solved?
That's not what happened. You own the human life = resource point and I just piggybacked off this assumption. Now if this assumption is incorrect, then the entire house of cards falls including and especially your waste of resource argument.
 

ZPowers

New member
Joined
Feb 11, 2010
Messages
1,488
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
The bolded phrase is a subjective judgment. I consider killing an innocent baby worse than any possible outcome of it crying. As far as morality is concerned, if it came down to killing an adult, my response might be different depending on the situation.

Fine, considerably worse from an outside, bottom line and/or utilitarian view: to wit: kill the baby = dead baby, guilty conscience. Let it live= Baby still dies, probably in a more agonizing fashion, along with many other people, possibly including other children.
 

ZPowers

New member
Joined
Feb 11, 2010
Messages
1,488
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Also: my claim that killing the baby is the better option does NOT mean A) I want to do it, obviously or B) if I were in the situation, I could. That proclamation is made using total logic and detachment. If I somehow were in a position like this, it's very, very possible (probably likely) I simply could not make myself do it. But I will probably never know for sure. Which is fine by me.
 

ScorpioINTP

New member
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
346
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
6-5
I've wanted to kill babies crying on airplanes or movie theaters. :steam::yes:

But seriously, if it meant everyone else dying, then the baby has got to go as a last resort. I'm sure it would be easier for someone not related to do the killing and no I would not want to be the one to do it, but I saw the movie too and I know what happens. No one can truly know how they would act unless they are in the situation with their lives at risk and know the terror they would be about to face.

I feel guilty if I hit an animal with my car...even a squirrel.
 
F

figsfiggyfigs

Guest
Well. If I have learned anything from this thread, is that I'm never getting in a cellar with 12 of you.
 

Oaky

Travelling mind
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
6,180
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
The situation is hypothetical until the choice and the set situation has been made. I wouldn't kill the baby. Not in my interests. Being alive is not necessarily always in my personal interests also. Once the choice has been made I would enjoy the outcome of trying to kill a few nazi soldiers were they to find us. Me and two others stay up on ground floor hidden behind a few objects. The baby's cries could be a decoy for them to look towards a certain direction while we give them a good surprise from behind as they look down hopefully allowing us to steal a few guns in the process assuming we have no guns. It would have to be played out perfectly.
 
F

figsfiggyfigs

Guest
Being alive is not necessarily always in my personal interests also.

I don't think you'd have a "personal interest" once you're dead.



The baby's cries could be a decoy for them to look towards a certain direction


As great of a plan as that is. Nazi's don't "look", they just start shooting shit.

So you would've killed the baby anyways.
 

Oaky

Travelling mind
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
6,180
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I don't think you'd have a "personal interest" once you're dead.
Oho! I now know something I might have in common with my dead self.
As great of a plan as that is. Nazi's don't "look", they just start shooting shit.

So you would've killed the baby anyways.
Always about timing. Someone must move before the trigger is pulled. Requires fast paced action and wondrous movement of arm to neck styles.
 

Oaky

Travelling mind
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
6,180
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Alright there Jackie Chan.
Oh this now changes the whole scenario. I am now hypothetically jackie chan under a floorboard with jewish people. We must remember that jackie chan always prevails in his movies.
 
F

figsfiggyfigs

Guest
Oh this now changes the whole scenario. I am now hypothetically jackie chan under a floorboard with jewish people. We must remember that jackie chan always prevails in his movies.

And he's a bad ass that changes the hearts of the evil doers. So You might even change the hearts of the Nazis!
 

Oaky

Travelling mind
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
6,180
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
And he's a bad ass that changes the hearts of the evil doers. So You might even change the hearts of the Nazis!
Ah yes, for sure. :solidarity:
 
Top