oK... if you had the choice to help some people but at the cost of hurting 10% of them, would you choose to help them knowing that you are hurting 10% of them or choose not to help? For example... if you are helping 10 people, you hurt 1... BUT if you help 1000000 people, you hurt 100000 people... wat do you guys think?-rockon
And the cost of not helping them at all is..? also what do you mean by 'hurt', you mean a scrape, cut, wound or death?
This topic is very broad, there could be many cases such as hurting the person to the point where they could possibly die. We actually had a class discussion on this topic. Example: I am walking down the road and there is two train tracks parallel to me. I see that a train is coming forward from a distance and that there is an old lady (who is deaf) on one track and 10 stoners with headphones on the other track. I am too far to warn any of them. I see a switch close to me. The train is currently heading towards the 10 guys. Should I feel obliged to turn that switch in order to save them, by harming that one lady? Or should I just walk away?? should we feel obliged? Do we have a right to kill that 10%? Wouldn't it be on our conscience that we killed that 10%?
i wouldn't touch any switches if it means one or the other will die, also in the real world i would prolly get done for manslaughter, but i would try my best to shout and warn the guys who are stupid enough to be walking on a track with headphones on and their back towards oncoming traffic, i would try to help the old lady myself if i was sure i could do it without getting killed myself while wondering why an old lady is on a track. There is also a possibility that they will die as a result of their actions (which in this case are stupid and dangerous). The wording of the question puts the burden of their stupidity (Sorry old lady) on the poor folk who happen to see them at that time, it doesnt work like that in RL I would tell them the consequences of me helping them, then they could decide, those who dont want help can stay back, those who do want help at the risk of getting hurt will get the help. got any more?
this is toooo broad matey!! ethical issues/problems are needed to be explained specifically.. hurt can mean many things but imo... to reach a goal that you know you have to "hurt" someone... its not unethical to do so coz what if the issue is that big that can cause all of them to dye? you might as well save who you can and leave the others... or do the "rock papers scissors" ethics can mean totally different to all of us anyways.. in my eyes.. it is ethical when you can do all you can and reduce the risk of unwanted consequences...
these questions are worded in a way were your responsible for the actions and dilemmas of others and your always in a lose - lose situation. instead of ethics focusing on silly hypothetical situations they should focus on general morality in everyday life as the west is lacking it nowadays.
so true a question that is about a lose - lose situation it isn't called ethics imo, it's caklled personal choice and morals but if the morals that have to be thought of in the western world is more about racism and how to give respect to others than to sleep and buoy off the person... stop the stupid hooliganism... work together and make the world a better place like in this recession epriods other than stupid strikes the HK people are doing because of lost investments... the lists goes on... however some people have no ethical values because they have no self morals or respect for themselves...
aye Last time i checked i believe the value of a human life was about £800 or thereabouts, less in poorer countries. what gives people the idea that they can put a monetary value on peoples life is beyond me. but then again, ethics is not written in stone (like the 10 commandments) so its very relative depending on who its coming from.
Insightful views. Now its going to be a headache. Ethics is a social construct based on belief system. It can be influence depending on your religion, race, cultural inheritance, trends, fear, self preservation and exposure to conform. That can be reduce to a mathematical equation where outcomes can be calculated. In short, there is such a thing as Game theory. Check out this vid on Ted.com. Its says it all. Its really illuminating. http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/507
I didn't mean literally put a real price on human life... I meant evaluating the solicitation to make sure what could possibly be lost against what can be gained. What you're thinking about is what they did with the Ford Pinto. Look it up, pretty good case study for ethics in engineering design. EDIT: Another good one is the case of schizophrenic Vince Li and the greyhound bus beheading. He was deemed not criminally responsible for murdering an innocent man and his disturbing actions.
no im serious, they actually put a price on a human being for example, when making a bridge they will say "if the bridge falls and 10 people die" in human costs it will be £8000 damage as each human is worth £800 (actually i think its less). so basically people are just a small monetary value to the people at the top. aww im not into this ethics stuff, i just wanted them questions but the OP has done a runner :( right now im gong by what i learned from a law module last term lol
about the schizphrenic case... its not about ethics its about the law system being corrupted... ethics is a social construct but everyone interprets differently not everyone feels the same about ethical issues.. like testing animals with products, to hurt someones feeling to get a research done, or even the issue about the mentally ill gets some sort of "downgrade" of a crime that they have done (although they mostly dont get set the "no further action" treatmeant) the whole ethical issues revolves around the broken/corrupted world we are in right now
Great ! Good to know that you like it Whenever I tell some of my friends about how wonderful TED is, they will go into convulsions... lol. I think we live in an age where thinking is scoff upon.
