Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Gods_Mercenary · May 6, 2008, 07:07 pm

Ha , fair enough on the vasall issue, I suppose that's the difference with France. but I'd imagine the last 50 years would have been quite different under Hitler's thumb.

As to a racially inferior empire, what the hell was all of slavic Eurpe, and why couldn't he just drive other races out, like he planned to do p to the Urals anyway.

Simonius · May 6, 2008, 07:10 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary

Ha , fair enough on the vasall issue, I suppose that's the difference with France. but I'd imagine the last 50 years would have been quite different under Hitler's thumb.

As to a racially inferior empire, what the hell was all of slavic Eurpe, and why couldn't he just drive other races out, like he planned to do p to the Urals anyway.

Wasn't he going to subject them to genocide in the long run? Not slavery...

Actually you might have a point, but no aspect of what he did is free from inconsistency!

Gods_Mercenary · May 6, 2008, 07:12 pm

I don't pretend to know what he wanted, but it was probably slavery that would end up in genocide after tey had been worked to death.

Thanatos · May 6, 2008, 08:10 pm

As much as I love WWII history, this is drifting off topic.

Suppose you were operating a subway network and one of the trains has a brake failure. If you do nothing it hits the end of the tunnel and everyone on the train dies. You can also throw a switch to send it into a long narrow abandoned stretch of tunnel (so that the train can coast to a stop) that is closed for maintenance and inevitably flatten a lone construction worker. What do you do?

Suppose you had been one of Hitler's inner circle and had the chance to plant a bomb under his desk. If you do nothing, millions of people will die. If you do kill him, then your level-headed friend takes over and the war ends without further bloodshed but an innocent secretary will also be in the same room as the bomb when it goes off. What do you do?

Gods_Mercenary · May 6, 2008, 08:18 pm

Save the train, kill hitler and the secretary.

Winter wind · May 7, 2008, 09:41 am

Quote:

Quote by: gods mercenary

Save the train, kill hitler and the secretary.

See, I don't disagree, but then the means now include the death of one innocent person so the ends include the death of one more innocent person.

The ends make the means. So the more you taint the ends, the more you taint the means.

Dagda · May 7, 2008, 11:59 am

Quote:

Suppose you were operating a subway network and one of the trains has a brake failure. If you do nothing it hits the end of the tunnel and everyone on the train dies. You can also throw a switch to send it into a long narrow abandoned stretch of tunnel (so that the train can coast to a stop) that is closed for maintenance and inevitably flatten a lone construction worker. What do you do?

Suppose you had been one of Hitler's inner circle and had the chance to plant a bomb under his desk. If you do nothing, millions of people will die. If you do kill him, then your level-headed friend takes over and the war ends without further bloodshed but an innocent secretary will also be in the same room as the bomb when it goes off. What do you do]

I would say that is more an argument about Utilitarian Ethics than end justifing the means. Greatest good for the greatest number and all that. I suppose they are interlinced anyway.

Dagda · May 7, 2008, 12:01 pm

What? Why has the Quote appeared not in quote form?

Winter wind · May 7, 2008, 12:20 pm

you forgot to put the "]" on the first quote thing
you can still edit it.

Domino · May 7, 2008, 03:54 pm

Save the train, then go to the family of that lone construction worker and tell them what you did.

Kill Hitler, then go find the secretary's husband and tell him why she had to die.

It is not sufficient to simply get on a soap box and declare that your actions were for the best, even if the soap box is only in your heart. The best was accomplished at the expense of innocent life, and the shame of that should never be avoided. To take credit for only a part of the consequences of your actions is, at best, hypocritical.

GHook93 · May 7, 2008, 04:55 pm

It depends what the ends are and what the means taken is. Was going to war against Nazi German a good means to stop the Nazi war machine (ends). I would say yes.

In the case of Tibet, I am not sure. But China should be glad that the Tibetians are peaceful Buddist.

Gods_Mercenary · May 7, 2008, 06:00 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Winter wind

See, I don't disagree, but then the means now include the death of one innocent person so the ends include the death of one more innocent person.

The ends make the means. So the more you taint the ends, the more you taint the means.

I'd have far more trouble sleeping knowing I could have saved an entire train and millions of people than knowing I killed two people as a result of my well intentioned efforts. The way I see it morally, not doing anything when you are perfectly capable of saving people is just as much murder as actually causing their deaths.

Thanatos · May 7, 2008, 11:20 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary

I'd have far more trouble sleeping knowing I could have saved an entire train and millions of people than knowing I killed two people as a result of my well intentioned efforts. The way I see it morally, not doing anything when you are perfectly capable of saving people is just as much murder as actually causing their deaths.

I could be wrong, but I think you're agreeing with each other and with me.

If there are 200 people on the train and you kill one innocent guy to save them, its more like saving 199.

Clarifying question: should the train switch operator go to jail for the murder of the construction worker? I say no and I think so will Winter Wind.

Anmon · May 8, 2008, 06:30 am

Quote:

=Thanatos;504015]
Suppose you were operating a subway network and one of the trains has a brake failure. If you do nothing it hits the end of the tunnel and everyone on the train dies. You can also throw a switch to send it into a long narrow abandoned stretch of tunnel (so that the train can coast to a stop) that is closed for maintenance and inevitably flatten a lone construction worker. What do you do?

If given that choice you obviously kill the lone construction worker, and save everyone else.

Quote:

Suppose you had been one of Hitler's inner circle and had the chance to plant a bomb under his desk. If you do nothing, millions of people will die. If you do kill him, then your level-headed friend takes over and the war ends without further bloodshed but an innocent secretary will also be in the same room as the bomb when it goes off. What do you do?

A no brainer sorry, you kill Hitler and the secretary and save millions of people.

BorisTheFerret · May 8, 2008, 07:50 am

The end very rarely jusitifies the means, since the means inevitably entails a corrruption of the end to which one strives.

grandpa · May 8, 2008, 08:59 am

Quote:

Quote by: BorisTheFerret

The end very rarely jusitifies the means, since the means
inevitably entails a corrruption of the end to which one
strives.

As much as possible , we should use the means to calculate the ends. Where people fail to do this, I'm sure they become a less open society.

Grandpa h.

GHook93 · May 8, 2008, 10:07 am

Did all the sacrifices of the civil rights activist for the means not justify the "equality" (or close to it) that we have today (ends)?

Did the American Revolution (means) not justify the best country on God's Green Earth (ends)?

If has to be evaluated on a case to case basis! There can be no blanket assessments.

BorisTheFerret · May 8, 2008, 10:20 am

Quote:

Quote by: GHook93

Did the American Revolution (means) not justify the best country on God's Green Earth (ends)?

Speak for yourself; I think you could build a strong case that the various 'means' employed by the American government down the years (and certainly today) betray the very noble ideals of the American Revolution.

Dagda · May 8, 2008, 11:42 am

Quote:

Did the American Revolution (means) not justify the best country on God's Green Earth (ends)?

You have it wrong, Scotland is the greatest country on earth!

GHook93 · May 8, 2008, 12:54 pm

Quote:

Quote by: BorisTheFerret

Speak for yourself; I think you could build a strong case that the various 'means' employed by the American government down the years (and certainly today) betray the very noble ideals of the American Revolution.

That brings up a similar interconnected concept. What one believes is a justifiable end is not what another person mind feel is justifed. Same with the means!

May 6, 2008, 07:07 pm	#21 (permalink) (top)
Gods_Mercenary Altruism Assassin Location: Massachusetts Posts: 3,892	Ha , fair enough on the vasall issue, I suppose that's the difference with France. but I'd imagine the last 50 years would have been quite different under Hitler's thumb. As to a racially inferior empire, what the hell was all of slavic Eurpe, and why couldn't he just drive other races out, like he planned to do p to the Urals anyway. “What is the use of straining after an amiable view of things, when a cynical view is most likely to be the true one?” -George Bernard Shaw *Your friendly neighborhood Mercenary*

May 6, 2008, 07:12 pm	#23 (permalink) (top)
Gods_Mercenary Altruism Assassin Location: Massachusetts Posts: 3,892	I don't pretend to know what he wanted, but it was probably slavery that would end up in genocide after tey had been worked to death. “What is the use of straining after an amiable view of things, when a cynical view is most likely to be the true one?” -George Bernard Shaw *Your friendly neighborhood Mercenary*

May 6, 2008, 08:10 pm	#24 (permalink) (top)
Thanatos Igneous Magma Location: New Hampshire Posts: 658	As much as I love WWII history, this is drifting off topic. Suppose you were operating a subway network and one of the trains has a brake failure. If you do nothing it hits the end of the tunnel and everyone on the train dies. You can also throw a switch to send it into a long narrow abandoned stretch of tunnel (so that the train can coast to a stop) that is closed for maintenance and inevitably flatten a lone construction worker. What do you do? Suppose you had been one of Hitler's inner circle and had the chance to plant a bomb under his desk. If you do nothing, millions of people will die. If you do kill him, then your level-headed friend takes over and the war ends without further bloodshed but an innocent secretary will also be in the same room as the bomb when it goes off. What do you do? Destroying America one Volconvo post at a time. If you've ever come close to having a coronary about whether or not people walked on the moon you probably have a small penis.

May 6, 2008, 08:18 pm	#25 (permalink) (top)
Gods_Mercenary Altruism Assassin Location: Massachusetts Posts: 3,892	Save the train, kill hitler and the secretary. “What is the use of straining after an amiable view of things, when a cynical view is most likely to be the true one?” -George Bernard Shaw *Your friendly neighborhood Mercenary*

May 7, 2008, 12:20 pm	#29 (permalink) (top)
Winter wind Trenchcoat Mickey Location: Hong Kong, China Posts: 1,642	you forgot to put the "]" on the first quote thing you can still edit it. Don't forget this is all in good fun! "No matter if it is a white cat or a black cat; as long as it can catch mice, it is a good cat." Deng Xiaoping

May 7, 2008, 12:01 pm	#28 (permalink) (top)
Dagda Molten Ash Posts: 79	What? Why has the Quote appeared not in quote form?

May 7, 2008, 03:54 pm	#30 (permalink) (top)
Domino I'm a pushover Posts: 334	Save the train, then go to the family of that lone construction worker and tell them what you did. Kill Hitler, then go find the secretary's husband and tell him why she had to die. It is not sufficient to simply get on a soap box and declare that your actions were for the best, even if the soap box is only in your heart. The best was accomplished at the expense of innocent life, and the shame of that should never be avoided. To take credit for only a part of the consequences of your actions is, at best, hypocritical. kill President attack nuclear bomb smuggle Echelon just recorded this message.

May 7, 2008, 04:55 pm	#31 (permalink) (top)
GHook93 Aristotle Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 3,799	It depends what the ends are and what the means taken is. Was going to war against Nazi German a good means to stop the Nazi war machine (ends). I would say yes. In the case of Tibet, I am not sure. But China should be glad that the Tibetians are peaceful Buddist.

May 8, 2008, 07:50 am	#35 (permalink) (top)
BorisTheFerret Outlaw Mustela Location: The Woods. Posts: 38	The end very rarely jusitifies the means, since the means inevitably entails a corrruption of the end to which one strives.

May 8, 2008, 10:07 am	#37 (permalink) (top)
GHook93 Aristotle Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 3,799	Was the huge struggle of the civil rights movement for equality not justified ends! Did all the sacrifices of the civil rights activist for the means not justify the "equality" (or close to it) that we have today (ends)? Did the American Revolution (means) not justify the best country on God's Green Earth (ends)? If has to be evaluated on a case to case basis! There can be no blanket assessments.