"Killing a fewer people for the sake of theoretical many is immoral. Limiting the happiness of a fewer people for the sake of a theoretical many, is immoral. "

Flame » in reply to re: Eugenics is science guided by morality, but not many support the idea.

"Killing a fewer people for the sake of theoretical many is immoral. Limiting the happiness of a fewer people for the sake of a theoretical many, is immoral. "

ARRELL — 4/30/2008 8:08:53 PM (archived)

Killing a fewer people for the sake of theoretical many is immoral. Limiting the happiness of a fewer people for the sake of a theoretical many, is immoral.

Interesting... So, you are saying that killing 10's of thousands of Iraqi's so that a theoretical 'many' can be theoretically 'safer' is immoral- right?

I also must assume that you are also a strong and vocal opponent of the death penalty, right?

I must assume the above, because the alternative is to assume that you are an ignorant, shallow, immoral person who is incapable of seeing the inherent contradictions between what he supports and what he claims to be his own personal morality...

Of course it is odd that you follow the above statement with "I would be happy to kill any scientist or doctor that actually thinks they have a right to harm or murder humans [and of course, acts on this belief] in the name of science or "progress".

wouldnt that be "Killing a fewer people for the sake of a theoretical many"?

You really dont see any contradictions here, do you?

The whole thread (39 posts)

Should science be guided by morality? (n/t) - Jody - 4/27/2008 11:06:17 PM
- I am a stem cell research advocate - Jody - 4/29/2008 1:57:18 AM
  - So, really is Bush. - Bowser - 4/29/2008 5:23:24 PM
    - ...and I will be more than happy to research your stem...awoka woka (n/t) - Jody - 4/29/2008 8:04:37 PM
      - Just stay out of his genes (n/t) - ARRELL - 4/30/2008 6:32:31 PM
        
        No DNA swapping! (n/t) - Tony - 5/1/2008 7:29:54 PM
      - What're you celling? (n/t) - Bowser - 4/29/2008 8:18:13 PM
        
        proper stimulation (n/t) - Jody - 4/29/2008 9:36:29 PM
        
        Don't you mean stem-ulation? (n/t) - ER - 4/30/2008 12:25:59 PM
        
        Damn! I wish I had thought of that! (n/t) - Jody - 4/30/2008 3:29:51 PM
        
        You didn't? What WERE you thinking? :-) (n/t) - Bowser - 4/30/2008 7:47:53 PM
- Eugenics is science guided by morality, but not many support the idea. - Lee - 4/28/2008 5:48:28 PM
  - re: Eugenics is science guided by morality, but not many support the idea. - gbaikie - 4/29/2008 2:05:27 AM
    - "Killing a fewer people for the sake of theoretical many is immoral. Limiting the happiness of a fewer people for the sake of a theoretical many, is immoral. " - ARRELL - 4/30/2008 8:08:53 PM
      - re: "Killing a fewer people for the sake of theoretical many is immoral. Limiting the happiness of a fewer people for the sake of a theoretical many, is immoral. " - gbaikie - 4/30/2008 11:51:59 PM
    - "I would be happy to kill any scientist or doctor...", anyone missing the irony here....? - ARRELL - 4/29/2008 1:18:48 PM
      - Eugenics occurs everyday in this country. - Lee - 4/29/2008 8:31:27 PM
      - re: "I would be happy to kill any scientist or doctor...", anyone missing the irony here....? - gbaikie - 4/29/2008 7:04:58 PM
        
        "I would be happy to kill any scientist or doctor" .... "No, I wouldn't be happy "to kill any scientist or doctor..."" - ARRELL - 4/30/2008 9:17:01 PM
        
        re: "I would be happy to kill any scientist or doctor" .... "No, I wouldn't be happy "to kill any scientist or doctor..."" - gbaikie - 5/1/2008 1:34:59 AM
        
        Apparently YOU are the ONLY one that missed the fundamental contradictions in your post... - ARRELL - 5/1/2008 1:55:27 AM
        
        re: Apparently YOU are the ONLY one that missed the fundamental contradictions in your post... - gbaikie - 5/1/2008 3:39:15 AM
        
        re: Apparently YOU are the ONLY one that missed the fundamental contradictions in your post... - ARRELL - 5/2/2008 7:49:08 AM
        
        Post by Herb removed. - moderite podrock - 5/2/2008 7:50:26 PM
      - Word substitution exercise--reductio ad adsurdum - ER - 4/29/2008 2:48:44 PM
        
        re: Word substitution exercise--reductio ad adsurdum - gbaikie - 4/29/2008 7:28:08 PM
        
        I think "All the above posts [ER and ARRELL] are perfect examples of..." - alcaray - 4/29/2008 8:03:05 PM
        
        *giggle* (n/t) - Jody - 4/29/2008 8:06:14 PM
        
        re: More Irony - Yeti - 4/29/2008 4:30:13 PM
- AU, contraire. Morality should be guided by science... - nick hoffman - 4/28/2008 11:51:35 AM
  - Good morality IS science. - SDAI-Tech1 - 4/30/2008 12:01:47 AM
  - Nice! I like that (n/t) - McFly - 4/29/2008 9:09:38 PM
  - re: AU, contraire. Morality should be guided by science... - gbaikie - 4/29/2008 1:34:08 AM
    - "Name one" - ARRELL - 4/29/2008 1:23:04 PM
  - Excellent point. And indeed, sometimes it is. - Bowser - 4/28/2008 5:08:26 PM
- Science itself? No. - Mary Anne - 4/28/2008 4:28:13 AM
- Science should not be guided by morality. - ER - 4/27/2008 11:59:45 PM
- Which morality? Whose? Regarding what? - Bowser - 4/27/2008 11:16:50 PM
- And: Should morality be guided by science? - podrock - 4/27/2008 11:14:58 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Flame

The whole thread (39 posts)