Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="n00b f00" data-source="post: 6795861" data-attributes="member: 6795700">This is my main point. In real life life guards let go of thrashing drowners, rescuers call off searches if it's too dangerous, sailors seal in their own to flooding compartments, climbers will cut a line if it's suddenly too heavy, officers will call in ordnance on close to their own position, doctors in triage will decide who lives and who dies. All of those are situations in which someone trying to save people, will make the calculated decision to let one person die, for some mission goal. Generally saving even more lives. In all of those situations the person making the decision may be wrong, and also if they so chose could try to keep everyone alive no matter the cost.We can argue how virtuous or heroic the decision is to not close the door for another 30 seconds and drown your best friend is. But the facts are that this happens in real life, these people are almost never charged. And no one ever goes up to them and says "Hey Bob you murdered your friend John cause you're a lazy bum." Which is what Maxperson is saying. That someone should risk infinite lives to save 1, and any other action is one of selfishness and personal laziness.Which may indeed be true, that an action that is not Good and Heroic is Evil, a neccesary evil but evil all the same. I've seen lots of people argue this point, and it's not one I'm willing to argue over myself. But in real life people do this and are never publicly looked down upon. Our society seems to be okay with this behavior if it seems justified. So if you want to say it's morally wrong that's totally fine, I don't necessarily disagree. But don't say it's the mentally of a few deviants, because it certainly is not.</blockquote>

Verification