Philosophical Dilemma.

[cry freedom]

Having spent more time than I should on other threads recently reading about objective an subjective morality I would like to pose the following philosophical dilemma:

You are a world famous zoologist and explorer and through circumstances too complicated to go into here, you find yourself somewhere in north Africa, rescuing a very rare species of animal.

It is the last surviving male Walia ibex and your mission is to bring it safely to the San Diego zoo to hopefully mate with the only other known female of the species.

Your assistant on the trip is a man you do not have much respect for. He was forced on you through events beyond your control and you wish you had never met him.

He is untrustworthy and cruel and an altogether unpleasant member of the human race.

Anyway,a situation develops whereby this man becomes trapped in quick sand [a la Laurence of Arabia] and the ibex falls into the same trap.

You, standing on the edge of the quick sand suddenly realize you can only rescue one or the other of then, but not both.

You have only one hour to make up your mind and being incommunicado with the rest of civilization can not ask for outside help or guidance.

Answers on a postcard please.

[Cato]

Having spent more time than I should on other threads recently reading about objective an subjective morality I would like to pose the following philosophical dilemma:

Have you been reading Peter Singer?

[cry freedom]

Have you been reading Peter Singer?

NO. Please don't tell me this is not at least a little original.

[MauriceColgan]

Having spent more time than I should on other threads recently reading about objective an subjective morality I would like to pose the following philosophical dilemma:

You are a world famous zoologist and explorer and through circumstances too complicated to go into here, you find yourself somewhere in north Africa, rescuing a very rare species of animal.

It is the last surviving male Walia ibex and your mission is to bring it safely to the San Diego zoo to hopefully mate with the only other known female of the species.

Your assistant on the trip is a man you do not have much respect for. He was forced on you through events beyond your control and you wish you had never met him.

He is untrustworthy and cruel and an altogether unpleasant member of the human race.

Anyway,a situation develops whereby this man becomes trapped in quick sand [a la Laurence of Arabia] and the ibex falls into the same trap.

You, standing on the edge of the quick sand suddenly realize you can only rescue one or the other of then, but not both.

You have only one hour to make up your mind and being incommunicado with the rest of civilization can not ask for outside help or guidance.

Answers on a postcard please.

You get the guy to promise he will change for the better if you save him.

He does promise of course, showing his real humanity.

Then you save the other animal.

[Cato]

NO. Please don't tell me this is not at least a little original.

I'm afraid not, although I think his one involved a gun and a charging rare elephant...

[toughbutfair]

I'd save the animal, with the caveat that when it breeds it specias should be in their natural environment as they have some function e.g. they might eat another specie thereby keeping the other species numbers down.

At least it is a better dilemma than the one about "would you throw 1 person off a boat, so that it would stay afloat and the others would survive" I never even understood how that was a dilemma.

[cry freedom]

I'm afraid not, although I think his one involved a gun and a charging rare elephant...

Oh bollocks !

[Cato]

Oh bollocks !

Indeed, but I wouldn't let it bother you too much.

As to the dilemma; I would say save the man. We owe that to our common humanity as per the doctrine of oikeiosis.

[cry freedom]

Indeed, but I wouldn't let it bother you too much.

As to the dilemma; I would say save the man. We owe that to our common humanity as per the doctrine of oikeiosis.

Ah well, In for a penny.....
My reaction would be to save the ibex.
Is one person out of 6 billion [and growing] too high a price to pay for
the survival of a [COLOR="Black"]whole[/COLOR] species
Do we save the son of a b.... just because he is [COLOR="black"]our[/COLOR] son of a b....
Is anti chauvinism allowed across species.

[Rich OC]

Having spent more time than I should on other threads recently reading about objective an subjective morality I would like to pose the following philosophical dilemma:

You are a world famous zoologist and explorer and through circumstances too complicated to go into here, you find yourself somewhere in north Africa, rescuing a very rare species of animal.

It is the last surviving male Walia ibex and your mission is to bring it safely to the San Diego zoo to hopefully mate with the only other known female of the species.

Your assistant on the trip is a man you do not have much respect for. He was forced on you through events beyond your control and you wish you had never met him.

He is untrustworthy and cruel and an altogether unpleasant member of the human race.

Anyway,a situation develops whereby this man becomes trapped in quick sand [a la Laurence of Arabia] and the ibex falls into the same trap.

You, standing on the edge of the quick sand suddenly realize you can only rescue one or the other of then, but not both.

You have only one hour to make up your mind and being incommunicado with the rest of civilization can not ask for outside help or guidance.

Answers on a postcard please.

Humans trump animals every time.