SeahorseTreble@lemmy.world to Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world · 1 year agoIf one innocent person is tortured so that everyone else can live and the world doesn't end, is that simultaneously unfair but also morally preferable over complete destruction of everything?message-squaremessage-square50fedilinkarrow-up149arrow-down15
arrow-up144arrow-down1message-squareIf one innocent person is tortured so that everyone else can live and the world doesn't end, is that simultaneously unfair but also morally preferable over complete destruction of everything?SeahorseTreble@lemmy.world to Ask Lemmy@lemmy.world · 1 year agomessage-square50fedilink
minus-squareintensely_human@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up6arrow-down1·1 year agoNo it’s not morally preferable. Fuck that world that requires human sacrifice.
minus-squareLmaydev@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoI mean the “first world” is built entirely on the sacrifices of the rest of the world. People live in unimaginably horrible conditions so that we can consume and be free.
minus-squareRBWells@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 year agoI agree. It would be practical and coldhearted, not moral. It’s also a fake question because there is no situation where torturing someone makes the world a better place.
No it’s not morally preferable. Fuck that world that requires human sacrifice.
I mean the “first world” is built entirely on the sacrifices of the rest of the world. People live in unimaginably horrible conditions so that we can consume and be free.
I agree. It would be practical and coldhearted, not moral.
It’s also a fake question because there is no situation where torturing someone makes the world a better place.