A Moral Dilemma

Quote from daniel_m:




and that third option is.......... come on babak, the suspense is killing me!
More...

ok...I'll tell you!

I know some will roll their eyes but this is what I would try to do (keep in mind that I have taken some poetic liscence with the story/scenario that you presented)

I would make the train jump the tracks before it entered either tunnel. Thereby saving both the man and the children in the tunnels.

(this is assuming that this was a cargo and not a passenger train those inside the train, few engineers, would only sustain some injury but probably not death)

ok now go ahead and roll your eyes!! lol :D

But on a more serious note...there is a reason why I said that there is a third option. Rather than get into a whole rant about why, I'll show you with a famous true story from history:

An army in Tyrol had surrounded the impregnable castle Hochosterwitz and had it under siege. The army was getting restless and the commander had other pressing things to do. Inside, the fortress commandant was faced with the fact that they were down to their last ox and last barrel of barley.

You are the fortress commandant. What would you do? Give up by sending a soldier with a white flag to the enemy encampment to deliver your unconditional surrender?

Or would you ration the remaining food (oxen and barley) and try to hold out till the enemy left or their will/resources ran out?

I'll tell you what really happened after you tell me what you would do. And no sneaking around the net to find out !! :D
 
i don't get it. what difference would it make at that point in time how much food was left?

if there is still ANY food left, why not just fight on. when the hunger gets so unbearable that you can't take it any longer, why not just surrender then?
 
well, like FPC? said :p, it is 5 to 1. i WANT to let the man live because he purposely diverted the train so he could do his work. it's the kids who made a bad decision to play there. i suppose you could maybe argue that the man could have put a sign up or something on the other tunnel. anyway, i still think you gotta go with killing the man because it is 5 lives to 1.
 
Babak: well i'd eat the food and then surrender, but, yeah, once the pain of hunger became unbearable i'd surrender. now hit me with the other option (i have a feeling i know where this is going..)

Gekko: so, essentially, you think it's OK to kill a completely innocent man in order to save the lives of others?
 
Quote from daniel_m:

Gekko: so, essentially, you think it's OK to kill a completely innocent man in order to save the lives of others?
More...
you could argue that they're all innocent in some way.

recently in my favorite tv show, "24", a woman who could possibly prevent a nuclear bomb from going off said she would only do so if she was able to murder an innocent man and be pardoned for it by the president. the president did not want to grant her wish, but he realized that saving the lives of millions outweighed that of one man. it wasn't something that didn't bother him greatly, but he knew it was the right choice and granted her wish.

p.s. in the show, they shot the woman before she was able to shoot the man. so he was saved anyway..
 
Quote from Gordon Gekko:


you could argue that they're all innocent in some way.
More...

well, not just in 'some way', they are all completely innocent.

the thing is, by not diverting the train, you are simply allowing some event to occur.

but by diverting the train, you are purposely taking someone's life.
 
ok...I'm back to the computer. I was away for a bit (and already having ET withdrawl!)

So here is what happened (the beseiged fortress situation I described previously):

The fortress commander ordered to the total shock of his soldiers that they kill the ox, empty its innards and in their stead stuff the bags of barley inside it. Then sow it up tightly.

They were totally agast at this as they simply could not understand how in the world this would save their hides in such a predicament. But, remembering that if they didn't follow orders their heads would be swiftly removed...they did as they were told.

Once they had done this crude 'surgery' the fortress commander ordered them to now place the stuffed ox on their best catapult and blast both the ox and the barley innards towards the beseiging enemy forces outside the gates of the fortress.

As you might imagine...there was more shock at this new order. There was even a murmur that the commander has lost his marbles in such a stressful situation. But they did follow his orders and flung their last and total morsel of food to the enemy.

On the other side of the gates, the enemy commander was analysing the situation. He was weighing the fact that he had to be somewhere else and that his soldiers were becoming weary of the long seige and his supply routes stretched. How long should he lay siege he was pondering?

Then a soldier ran into his tent and apologized for the interruption. "Sir, I think you should come and see this!"

He hurried out and once the soldiers parted ways he saw a huge carcass of an ox and within its guts spilling out barley !!

He hung his head and said "I knew it! Those bastards are in that fortress living it up. Probably throwing a feast and mocking us right now!! Look at how they throw us this crumb!"

He kicked the ox, causing even more barley to spill out.

"Tell the soldiers we are packing up and leaving at once!!"





And that is the story of the third choice.
 
Your friend is a beautiful blond who has been in the hospital dying for some time...You go to visit her and she asks you to do her a favor. She wants to have sex one last time before she dies. You reluctantly climb up on the gurney, lift up her little gown and start doing your thing....after about 5 minutes or so you start getting "close" to being done...you look down into her loving friendly eyes and realize much to your horror, she's dead!

My question is this: Do you finish up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top