They said that I was not being consistent at all, because I answer it's moral to kill for the first and third scneario, but immoral for the second one. It said, that there would be a question with my response that why it would be immoral for second scenario, while the structure, sacrificing a person for saving three lives, is similar with third scenario. Also they said that my responses are out of line, because if outcome is something that is counted, then second scenario also should be moral.
However, my opinion is a bit different. I chose first scenario to be moral, because it's not quite moral to let younger people exposed to cruel death. It's just better to make them die comfortably. Also they won't really have ability to make better decision at that age. That's why I chose it to be moral. However, for the second scenario, sailers were being selfish. Even though he was going be dead, they didn't have any right to kill a innocent boy. Tom dudley didn't even have determined mind, but he asked to another sailer whether he has to kill him for their survival, so in that situation, killing was done for their benefits. That's why I chose it to be immoral. The third scenario was quite similar to the second one, but the forth man was going to die in some minutes, while other three men were going to die in seconds. Therefore I thought that it would be more wise choice for forth person to sacrifice to save other men.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기