Philosophical Dilemma.

[cry freedom]

Originally Posted by Cato

In the first case: You are standing on a railway bridge. Looking down onto the track you see that it splits in two. On one siding there is the last remaining female Walia ibex (you are an expert on this animal); on the other siding there is a man. On the track there is a run-away train carriage. As things stand it will go onto the siding where the man is. Beside you there is a lever that controls which siding the carriage will go on. By pulling the lever you will save the man but kill the Walia ibex. It is impossible to alert the man (or the Walia ibex) to the danger. Your only choice is to pull the lever and save the man but kill the ibex or to leave things as they stand and allow the man to be killed.

What do you do?

In the second case: the situation is as above but is reversed; if you do nothing the ibex will get killed; if you pull the lever the man will get killed and the ibex will be saved.

What do you do?

In the third case: As in the second case, but you know the man to be a serial child rapist.

What do you do?

Yeah but !
The only problem with that scenario is that Half Nelson, jmcc and
Christal will introduce a super human CIE Station Master who will rush out and shoulder the train off the tracks, thus saving both.

[Half Nelson]

Originally Posted by Cato

In the first case: You are standing on a railway bridge. Looking down onto the track you see that it splits in two. On one siding there is the last remaining female Walia ibex (you are an expert on this animal); on the other siding there is a man. On the track there is a run-away train carriage. As things stand it will go onto the siding where the man is. Beside you there is a lever that controls which siding the carriage will go on. By pulling the lever you will save the man but kill the Walia ibex. It is impossible to alert the man (or the Walia ibex) to the danger. Your only choice is to pull the lever and save the man but kill the ibex or to leave things as they stand and allow the man to be killed.

What do you do?

In the second case: the situation is as above but is reversed; if you do nothing the ibex will get killed; if you pull the lever the man will get killed and the ibex will be saved.

What do you do?

In the third case: As in the second case, but you know the man to be a serial child rapist.

What do you do?

How is this a dilemma?
Your basis for saving the ibex is your own 'expert' knowledge, which you would put before a man's life.
If the man was your father what would you decide?

[Cato]

Originally Posted by Half Nelson

How is this a dilemma?
Your basis for saving the ibex is your own 'expert' knowledge, which you would put before a man's life.
If the man was your father what would you decide?

I didn't propose any solution; I merely asked a question. I specified that the man is an expert to head off any objection that the man would not know that the animal was an endangered species. His expert knowledge does not predetermine the correct thing to do.

[Half Nelson]

Originally Posted by Cato

I didn't propose any solution; I merely asked a question. I specified that the man is an expert to head off any objection that the man would not know that the animal was an endangered species. His expert knowledge does not predetermine the correct thing to do.

Sorry, the 'you' is in the same hypothetical person as your post above.

[Cato]

Originally Posted by Half Nelson

Sorry, the 'you' is in the same hypothetical person as your post above.

I take it that you would save the man's life in all three cases. What is your reasoning for this?

[Half Nelson]

Originally Posted by Cato

I take it that you would save the man's life in all three cases. What is your reasoning for this?

I prefer the company of men to that of goats, even if the goats have an exotic name.

[paulp]

Originally Posted by Cato

I take it that you would save the man's life in all three cases. What is your reasoning for this?

I value human life above that of an animal

[cry freedom]

Originally Posted by paulp

I value human life above that of an animal

In as far as I can ascertain the reason why the Walia Ibex is under pressure is because of the encroachment of mankind on its habitat.
The manta "all human life is sacred" had great validity back in biblical times when for the sake of tribal survival we were told to "go forth and multiply".
Surely it is time to rethink this fundamental view.
In the parable of the ibex the quick sand represents the whole planet and the two humans our population of 6 billion.
I am not suggesting a human population cull but I am saying that we should be looking seriously at ways of reducing the world population substantially over the next few centuries.

[evercloserunion]

Originally Posted by cry freedom

In as far as I can ascertain the reason why the Walia Ibex is under pressure is because of the encroachment of mankind on its habitat.
The manta "all human life is sacred" had great validity back in biblical times when for the sake of tribal survival we were told to "go forth and multiply".
Surely it is time to rethink this fundamental view.
In the parable of the ibex the quick sand represents the whole planet and the two humans our population of 6 billion.
I am not suggesting a human population cull but I am saying that we should be looking seriously at ways of reducing the world population substantially over the next few centuries.

You mean you're not saying that we should be looking seriously at developing a more efficient method of rescuing people or animals from quicksand?

[cry freedom]

Originally Posted by evercloserunion

You mean you're not saying that we should be looking seriously at developing a more efficient method of rescuing people or animals from quicksand?

Eh, no, Ted.