Re: Action vs Inaction (was: Arguments against LE ...)

Capitalist Pig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 22:53:45 +1100, Manfred Bartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>>I have been thinking through issues like this in the past and have
>>come to the conclusion that there is indeed no difference between
>>conscious action and conscious inaction.
>>
>
> You are a utilitarian.

Yes.

> Tell me, if you could save 10 human lives by killing a healthy young
> boy, harvesting his organs and proceed with transplanting them, would
> you do it? If not, why not? Aren't 10 lives more important than just
> one?

Of course I would not do or advocate that.

But there are countless examples where nearly as babaric judgments are
made.  For example:  In a military setting a commander must routinely
make judgements which involve exposing some of his soldiers to an
extremely high risk of getting killed in order to save many more.

> Remember that, according to you, there is no difference between
> conscious action and conscious inaction.

Yes, and I stand by that.  But there is a hierarchy of principles.

The principle that you don't kill fellow humans would override the
utility of harvesting organs.  One could even argue that the utility
of leading a safe life is more valuable than the utility of a life
where one has to worry about when one will be "harvested".

Of course the principle that you don't kill fellow humans could be
overridden too.  F.e. if a person poses a mortal threat to you or 
your community.

>>BTW: I am an engineer, not a philosopher.
>
> To be a philosopher you just need to start with one or more principles
> and logically deduct your way through.

I'll consider this for the extra years I might be getting through LE.

:)

-- 
Manfred Bartz