Folks,
Here is a thought experiment which may help to clarify our thoughts on the killing of a person.
Imagine that you are in Pakistan in 1999 and have the opportunity to meet and the means to kill Osama bin Laden. This can be done privately and you will be able to escape afterwards undetected.
Given the facts above, I would ask some questions that may enlighten us on our own views and feelings about killing.
1. Would you want to kill bin Laden?
2. I you do, do you feel that you have the stomach for a face to face killing?
3. If the answer to the first two questions if 'Yes', do you believe that the action is right?
Alex.
A thought experiment on killing
- Nonc Hilaire
- Posts: 6204
- Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am
Re: A thought experiment on killing
No and no.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”
Teresa of Ávila
Teresa of Ávila
Re: A thought experiment on killing
Nonc,Nonc Hilaire wrote:No and no.
It's good to get a straight answer. Thought experiments of this type are usually an invitation to evade.
My own feeling is that I don't know, either about what I would do or what I would think about it.
Alex.
Re: A thought experiment on killing
Folks,
Results so far:
I have asked the OP question on four forums, two forums with a clearly liberal membership and two forums with a less liberal membership.
The results have been interesting. On the liberal forums most respondents have answered directly, with the common view being ”Yes”. There has been little evasion of the issue, although some people questioned details of the thought experiments.
On the less liberal forums there have been no direct answers “Yes”, some reticence over answering the questions posed and some evasive replies.
I'm wondering why this is? It may be that the less liberal respondents are concerned about appearing aggressive in a public post, or just don't want to be drawn on the issue. OTOH it may be that the less liberal respondents are genuinely circumspect about acting against a terrorist. From these results, a conclusion isn't obvious to me at the moment.
Alex.
Results so far:
I have asked the OP question on four forums, two forums with a clearly liberal membership and two forums with a less liberal membership.
The results have been interesting. On the liberal forums most respondents have answered directly, with the common view being ”Yes”. There has been little evasion of the issue, although some people questioned details of the thought experiments.
On the less liberal forums there have been no direct answers “Yes”, some reticence over answering the questions posed and some evasive replies.
I'm wondering why this is? It may be that the less liberal respondents are concerned about appearing aggressive in a public post, or just don't want to be drawn on the issue. OTOH it may be that the less liberal respondents are genuinely circumspect about acting against a terrorist. From these results, a conclusion isn't obvious to me at the moment.
Alex.
Re: A thought experiment on killing
alex,manolo wrote:Folks,
Results so far:
I have asked the OP question on four forums, two forums with a clearly liberal membership and two forums with a less liberal membership.
The results have been interesting. On the liberal forums most respondents have answered directly, with the common view being ”Yes”. There has been little evasion of the issue, although some people questioned details of the thought experiments.
On the less liberal forums there have been no direct answers “Yes”, some reticence over answering the questions posed and some evasive replies.
I'm wondering why this is? It may be that the less liberal respondents are concerned about appearing aggressive in a public post, or just don't want to be drawn on the issue. OTOH it may be that the less liberal respondents are genuinely circumspect about acting against a terrorist. From these results, a conclusion isn't obvious to me at the moment.
Alex.
I would be interested to hear your definitions of liberal and less liberal.
thanks.
Re: A thought experiment on killing
SM,Simple Minded wrote:
alex,
I would be interested to hear your definitions of liberal and less liberal.
thanks.
I think my answer might be a tad subjective. I do know that the liberal forums had a preponderance of atheists and so called 'free thinkers' and the less liberal websites had more believers in the mix. I'm comfortable in either company due to my hopeful agnosticism.
Alex.
Re: A thought experiment on killing
too much cure id say, perfectly comfortable standing on the beach, gun in the had, shooting an arab.
ultracrepidarian
Re: A thought experiment on killing
noddy,noddy wrote:too much cure id say, perfectly comfortable standing on the beach, gun in the had, shooting an arab.
That is the plot crux of Albert Camus' novel 'The Outsider'. One of my favourite novels,if not the favourite.
Alex.
Re: A thought experiment on killing
The way I see it, there are two ways “right” is determined: first through the dictates of my own conscience and secondly through the rule of law.
Would I want to kill Bin Laden? Wanting would imply a clear conscience in his murder, and I would not have that. It is not that I would not be able to kill him or have the “stomach” to do that. I know what I am capable of. I just would not want to do it, since such an act would not be right with my conscience. Like Dostoevsky’s Raskolnikov, in spite of my efforts to flatter my sense of righteousness and to rationalize my act, I would never be able to shake the persistent accusations of transgression from my soul.
Would killing Bin Laden be right from rule of law? Unless he was charged, tried, convicted, and executed in accordance with our laws, no. Rule of law is not some quaint convenience, a fancy "liberal" fashion; it is the very foundation of civilization. Without it, might makes right, the meanest. most violent, and best armed bastards rule the rest, and chaos, stupidity, and suffering reign in such a place. To quote Dwight Eisenhower, the clearest way to show what the rule of law means to us in everyday life is to recall what has happened when there is no rule of law. Or, I would add, to intimately know the parts of the world where it is absent and listen carefully to the stories of people's lives in those wretched conditions. Such experiences will quickly disabuse you of any moral or legal complacency.
We place ourselves and others in grave danger if we dispose of the rule of law even to go after the very devil himself.
“I would give the devil the benefit of law for my own safety sake…”
PDBiLT3LASk
Would I want to kill Bin Laden? Wanting would imply a clear conscience in his murder, and I would not have that. It is not that I would not be able to kill him or have the “stomach” to do that. I know what I am capable of. I just would not want to do it, since such an act would not be right with my conscience. Like Dostoevsky’s Raskolnikov, in spite of my efforts to flatter my sense of righteousness and to rationalize my act, I would never be able to shake the persistent accusations of transgression from my soul.
Would killing Bin Laden be right from rule of law? Unless he was charged, tried, convicted, and executed in accordance with our laws, no. Rule of law is not some quaint convenience, a fancy "liberal" fashion; it is the very foundation of civilization. Without it, might makes right, the meanest. most violent, and best armed bastards rule the rest, and chaos, stupidity, and suffering reign in such a place. To quote Dwight Eisenhower, the clearest way to show what the rule of law means to us in everyday life is to recall what has happened when there is no rule of law. Or, I would add, to intimately know the parts of the world where it is absent and listen carefully to the stories of people's lives in those wretched conditions. Such experiences will quickly disabuse you of any moral or legal complacency.
We place ourselves and others in grave danger if we dispose of the rule of law even to go after the very devil himself.
“I would give the devil the benefit of law for my own safety sake…”
PDBiLT3LASk
Re: A thought experiment on killing
As Karl Marx pointed out who makes and who enforces the rule of law? Who Judges the judges? Who provides for the protection of inalienable rights? It seems to me that those are the questions that need a clear and solid foundation lest someone blow that house down.kmich wrote:The way I see it, there are two ways “right” is determined: first through the dictates of my own conscience and secondly through the rule of law.
Would I want to kill Bin Laden? Wanting would imply a clear conscience in his murder, and I would not have that. It is not that I would not be able to kill him or have the “stomach” to do that. I know what I am capable of. I just would not want to do it, since such an act would not be right with my conscience. Like Dostoevsky’s Raskolnikov, in spite of my efforts to flatter my sense of righteousness and to rationalize my act, I would never be able to shake the persistent accusations of transgression from my soul.
Would killing Bin Laden be right from rule of law? Unless he was charged, tried, convicted, and executed in accordance with our laws, no. Rule of law is not some quaint convenience, a fancy "liberal" fashion; it is the very foundation of civilization. Without it, might makes right, the meanest. most violent, and best armed bastards rule the rest, and chaos, stupidity, and suffering reign in such a place. To quote Dwight Eisenhower, the clearest way to show what the rule of law means to us in everyday life is to recall what has happened when there is no rule of law. Or, I would add, to intimately know the parts of the world where it is absent and listen carefully to the stories of people's lives in those wretched conditions. Such experiences will quickly disabuse you of any moral or legal complacency.
We place ourselves and others in grave danger if we dispose of the rule of law even to go after the very devil himself.
“I would give the devil the benefit of law for my own safety sake…”
PDBiLT3LASk
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros