SHOULD WE KILL HEALTHY PEOPLE FOR THEIR ORGANS?

[kombuchakid]

Suitably contrite after an astounding amount of admonishment, I will now turn and face full frontal the thorny problem of whether to Kill Bill or not.

These are standard counterexamples to utilitarianism, the moral philosophy that states that the morally correct action is the action that results in the most good for the most people. One reponse to these examples is called rule utilitarianism, which says that you cannot judge the morality of individual actions based on utility; rather, we should adopt the moral rules that result in the most good.

The general rule that we should kill an innocent individual to save many is a rule that, in the long run, would result in less good, and so it is not morally correct.

[edx]

If I had to pick, I'd kill you. Or if not you, the first Christian or Muslim I could identify. Next maybe a Jew. Next any ideologue. If everyone was an atheist, we'd call for a volunteer or toss a coin. What kind of question is this? Be serious.

If you want to propose a moral dilemma, try something that actually happens. Like:

if you knew your choice of a new car would indirectly kill 3 children or 6 children, which car would you buy?

or

if you knew that you were making 200,000 times in an hour what the guard and the janitor make together in a month, how much tax do you think is fair for you to pay?

or

should currency be based on gold?

Come on, should I shoot this dog if you refuse to convert to my religion?

[pinko]

Should organs be removed from death row inmates (after their death..) without their consent or without them even knowing?

[Mat]

Should organs be removed from death row inmates (after their death..) without their consent or without them even knowing?

Guess after their death they would not be knowing - unless of course they are looking at us from the sky.