If 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?
If 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?
You're viewing a single thread.
All Comments
96 comments
If that one innocent person agrees to it, I say yes. Otherwise, no.
22 0 ReplyIf nobody volunteers, we all go down.
4 0 ReplyThen it becomes are you willing to torture innocents to save everyone else?
0 0 ReplyIf they volunteer yes. But torture you sign up for isn’t torture; a key aspect of torture is its nonconsensual nature.
2 0 Reply
96 comments
Scroll to top