[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
If I understand the questions – once you decide that innocent children are allowed to be killed for “the greater good” all ethics go out the window. Do wtf you want.

No innocents should ever be killed for the greater good – that would be a contradiction. The innocents are the greater good.

Quote from phil153:

[ QUOTE ]
And you're on crack if you don't think that killing 8 kids is a lot worse than 5.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once you decide that one can be killed, then 5 and 8 become relatively meaningless. At that point we compare 1,5, or 8 to millions of people who we think we are saving. 1,5, or 8 are immaterial relative to millions or billions of “the greater good”. I don’t get your point, phil.

[/ QUOTE ]

Plane is in the air with a bomb. We have three actions to choose from -

1) return plane to hanger. 100,000 kids die.
2) hit target A. 5 kids die.
3) hit target X. 8 kids die.

How is this a problem? We actually get a choice about which consequences of our actions we can ignore? That allows us to justify any action. How that can be a moral way to exist seems delusional.

Oh, well, I knew the omission-commission claim would come up to justify horrid choices.

luckyme