Ok, assume you're in a circumstance in which you can either kill a man and therefore save the lives of two people who will die unless you do, or let him live and the other two will die- which do you choose, and why?
2006-10-21 17:12:54 · 22 answers · asked by fslcaptain737 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Three men, all of the same age, none of them have any family, all the same race, all the same...they are clones.
2006-10-21 17:16:31 · update #1
This is easy. All the circumstances are the same, so you kill the one man, so that two live. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Whatever I choose to do, I am responsible for the outcome, so I must kill the one to preserve the life of the two.
2006-10-21 17:26:47 · answer #1 · answered by coolguy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That depends on several different factors. However, assuming that all three people are innocent victims of circumstance, of equal age and with equal family lives and responsibilities, I would have to kill the one man. It is a horrible thing to have to kill a man, but it is worse to stand Idily by and watch while two people are killed when you can do something to save them.
2006-10-22 00:19:57 · answer #2 · answered by academic_girl2005 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the circumstances; if the man I had to kill is for the most part an innocent man, I would find it extremely difficult - but not impossible - to sacrifice his life so that two more innocent people can live.
I don't know. I can't give you an honest, sure answer without listing a bunch of hypothetical situations and various conditions that would affect my answer.
2006-10-22 00:59:03 · answer #3 · answered by Lilywhite 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not for us to choose who lives and who dies nor at what time or in what order. You also need to consider if the act of the one will kill the others and if by reasoning you can hope to save all three and then only killing the one man because he intends to take the other lives therefore choosing death himself.
2006-10-22 00:22:27 · answer #4 · answered by Thomas W 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would do nothing because two humans dead is better than one as the world has too many human population already. Tow dying is better than one so I would not kill one to save two unless those two people are my friends or relative or good citizens and the other one is a criminal. It all depends on who these people are before I commit killing someone. To take a life is a hard thing to do for a ordinary human being except for criminals. Criminals can kill easily because it is their job to kill and destroy lives.
Could be defective human genes in these criminal minds.
2006-10-22 00:19:10 · answer #5 · answered by unabletoplaytennis 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is honestly a hard one to answer...I would like to save the lives of the two others. But I believe in the "thou shalt not kill" and "the lord makes things happen for a reason"
I believe that if the lord wants us to die, whether we kill the first man or not if he has plans for the second two to die, then they will die. If he does not plan for them to die, he will intervene in one way or another.
To kill someone is murder and a sin.
2006-10-22 00:27:17 · answer #6 · answered by Patty 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This question is interesting the definiteness of outcomes. Also, leadingly, you do not mention if any threat is posed to me personally, so we'll make this really fun and assume not. However, ids he threatening the other two? Since I KNOW that this man will kile the other two people he must be posing immediate threats to both of their lives. So, yes, I would kill him to save the other two, since I KNOW that he will kill him and there is no intervening of free will on anybody's part here.
Reality is not so cut and dry, though.....
2006-10-22 00:20:11 · answer #7 · answered by el_cid_el_bivar 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd kill all three. What the heck - they're clones!
Well, unless they're mine and I think I might need some spare parts - then I'd kill one and freeze the other two (if you can clone 'em - I can freeze them!), until I needed them.
Or, if they were good looking women clones - I'd just kill one - and tell the other two I did it becase it looked like she was about to complain about something...
Oh wait. Men?? Ok. Skip previous paragraph then.
2006-10-22 00:24:38 · answer #8 · answered by Jon W 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All three clones! Of who? Me? Then I kill all three because I have a family and nobody is going to take that away from me.
Besides in the end there can be only one me.
2006-10-22 00:25:41 · answer #9 · answered by John 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the way you put it seems as if it really doesnt matter how many of the clones die, but i personally would kill the one person and let the other 2 live just because.
2006-10-22 00:18:35 · answer #10 · answered by Abel Z 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋