This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
What if that baby is Hitler? Would you kill him knowing it would save millions?
1-25 of 45
@Qwerty14
lol i thought the baby hitler idea would come up.
Still no.
You don't have to kill baby hitler to prevent him from doing what he did.
Supposing that you had pre-knowledge of what hitler would do, you could still, for example, kidnap him and raise him in a Buddhist monastery or a cabin in the woods where he would have no reason or ability to do what he did.
lol i thought the baby hitler idea would come up.
Still no.
You don't have to kill baby hitler to prevent him from doing what he did.
Supposing that you had pre-knowledge of what hitler would do, you could still, for example, kidnap him and raise him in a Buddhist monastery or a cabin in the woods where he would have no reason or ability to do what he did.
@Qwerty14
[quote] But you're changing the hypothetical to suit you[/quote]
I'm not changing a thing. The hypothetical is, is killing baby hitler moral.
My answer is no.
If you don't know what hitler will become then killing a baby is immoral.
If you DO know what hitler will become then it is STILL immoral because you could choose an option which does not take the life of a baby.
[quote] But you're changing the hypothetical to suit you[/quote]
I'm not changing a thing. The hypothetical is, is killing baby hitler moral.
My answer is no.
If you don't know what hitler will become then killing a baby is immoral.
If you DO know what hitler will become then it is STILL immoral because you could choose an option which does not take the life of a baby.
@Qwerty14
[quote] Just highlighting how the decision to kill someone to save others is always a tough one with grey areas. [/quote]
No you're not.
You're forcing a binary outcome where one need not exist.
I played your game, now you play mine.
If you don't know what hitler will become then killing a baby is immoral.
If you DO know what hitler will become then it is STILL immoral because you could choose an option which does not take the life of a baby.
Is it moral to kill baby hitler?
[quote] Just highlighting how the decision to kill someone to save others is always a tough one with grey areas. [/quote]
No you're not.
You're forcing a binary outcome where one need not exist.
I played your game, now you play mine.
If you don't know what hitler will become then killing a baby is immoral.
If you DO know what hitler will become then it is STILL immoral because you could choose an option which does not take the life of a baby.
Is it moral to kill baby hitler?
Entwistle · 56-60, M
Killing baby Hitler would save the lives of many other babies and children.
@Pikachu Do I personally see killing anyone to be morally right? No. Does that mean I see God as killing anyone morally wrong? Nope. And I also agree that killing someone to save millions is a pretty just reason.
So long story short: I'd never kill Hitler but if someone did I wouldn't blame them.
So long story short: I'd never kill Hitler but if someone did I wouldn't blame them.
@Qwerty14
[quote]Does that mean I see God as killing anyone morally wrong?[/quote]
So then describe a situation where god killing millions of babies is a morally justifiable action.
I posit that unless we throw out the notion of an omnipotent, infallible god as he is believed to be in christianity, then there IS no morally justifiable reason from him to kill babies.
[quote]but if someone did I wouldn't blame them.[/quote]
Why not?
The choices are
a) you don't know what hitler will do and it is therefor immoral to kill him as a baby or
b) you do know what hitler will become and you can choose an option which does not require murdering a baby.
So why wouldn't you blame them?
This is the same question again. By saying you wouldn't blame them, you're validating their act.
So are you validating an immoral act or do you believe it is moral?
[quote]Does that mean I see God as killing anyone morally wrong?[/quote]
So then describe a situation where god killing millions of babies is a morally justifiable action.
I posit that unless we throw out the notion of an omnipotent, infallible god as he is believed to be in christianity, then there IS no morally justifiable reason from him to kill babies.
[quote]but if someone did I wouldn't blame them.[/quote]
Why not?
The choices are
a) you don't know what hitler will do and it is therefor immoral to kill him as a baby or
b) you do know what hitler will become and you can choose an option which does not require murdering a baby.
So why wouldn't you blame them?
This is the same question again. By saying you wouldn't blame them, you're validating their act.
So are you validating an immoral act or do you believe it is moral?
DunDunDun · 22-25, F
@Qwerty14 "Oh I'd never kill anyone for any reason. But that's just me lol" So if you had a child, and you knew that if you didn't kill someone, then that person would slowly torture your child to death, you'd just be like, "No, KILLING IS WRONG REGARDLESS! I don't care if my child get slowly tortured to death."
@Pikachu I can believe something is immoral but also logical. Killing one to save millions is unquestionably the logical move. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one.
As I said before, God is the definition of morality in these religions thus can't be immoral. He is judge and knows right from wrong. His actions must be right or he wouldn't do them. That's why we have a character like Satan in the bible who questions God for us.
As I said before, God is the definition of morality in these religions thus can't be immoral. He is judge and knows right from wrong. His actions must be right or he wouldn't do them. That's why we have a character like Satan in the bible who questions God for us.
1-25 of 45