Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you want to claim you are consistent that is.


[/ QUOTE ]


Who wants to be consistent?


-Zeno

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

1. Life in itself is so important to be preserved - even for 3 more days - that I choose to live with my 1 hour headache, beyond any reason.
2. A 10% extra pain is an already self-assumed "bonus" by the smoker and I expect him to feel it and think "Is this all? All what I feared about in all those years?" Anyway, this problem postulates that the pain is something absolutely horrible, not worth to be endured, no matter the reasons or causes - which is not true at all.

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

1. I dont think I would decree that all the dogs in the world be euthanized but im having a hard time picking a number that i would stop at.

2. i really cant decide. probably flip a coin. given the exact scenario described i think i give it to Y. But it seems like you can manipulate the % to a point where the intent of the question remains teh same but I would want to switch my answer to X.

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

[ QUOTE ]
1. Life in itself is so important to be preserved - even for 3 more days - that I choose to live with my 1 hour headache, beyond any reason.


[/ QUOTE ]

Who says it is important to preserve life.

Better not use antibiotics. Bacteria is also a form of life.

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

Killing is something I was against even before getting any form of education or moral conduct principles.
As for those tiny beautiful bacteria, why don't you take one for a pet, as long as you don't see the difference?

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

1. No, the 10% chance that the dog might be adopted is the key. I can live with a headache to have a chance to really save a dog's life. Make the situation where the dog will be euthanized regardless and I say go for it.

2. Patient X. I don't think that patients should get worse care based on whether they were smokers or not. That seems like a really arbitrary thing for a hospital to punish someone for. Whoever needs the medication most should get it. (FTR, I'm not a smoker.)

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

1. No
2. X

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1. Life in itself is so important to be preserved


[/ QUOTE ]

You did not say there that life that comes in the form that can be made a pet is so important.

[ QUOTE ]

As for those tiny beautiful bacteria, why don't you take one for a pet, as long as you don't see the difference?

[/ QUOTE ]

So now you are saying the only form of life that should be preserved are pets? So lets change the question. Would you kill a scorpion to get rid of your headache, or tarantula. I have also seen people keep these at pets.

I find it slightly hypocritical when people say "no I would not kill the dog to get rid of my headache" But you will eat the chicken, eat the steak of animals killed. Aside from that you can imagine the ammount of products that come from killing animals or testing on animals that are around your house right now. You can not say that killing a dog to get rid of my horrible migraine is so wrong, but then bite into a piece of chicken to get rid of your hunger with something that tastes good.


Gelatin. Gel.
Protein obtained by boiling skin, tendons, ligaments, and/or bones with water. From cows and pigs. Used in shampoos, face masks, and other cosmetics. Used as a thickener for fruit gelatins and puddings (e.g., "Jello"). In candies, marshmallows, cakes, ice cream, yogurts. On photographic film and in vitamins as a coating and as capsules. Sometimes used to assist in "clearing" wines

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

I would like people to answer question no.2 stating if they are themselves smokers or non-smokers. I assume it is easy to be biased.

1. Spontaneously no for a 1h of headaches. Change the variables around a bit and I can see myself having that dog killed.

2. Patient Y (I am a non-smoker). The differences in pain levels need to be really severe to swing my vote.

Re: Two More \"Axiom\" Questions
 

[ QUOTE ]

ii) Premise: to protect the innocent is most important
Answer: 1) No 2) Y


[/ QUOTE ]
Queston no.1 asks about protecting an innocent dog while no.2 refers to human beings. I think I could be consistent by answering 1) Yes 2) Y if I do not value human beings and dogs equally.