How about simply KILL a man to take his winning megamillions ticket if you knew you wouldn't be caught? After all, you'll do more good with the money. You suggest that killing somebody would be justified by all the good things you could do with a hundred billion, certainly you could save a lot of lives for $100 million or even $10 million. But putting it out to the world, why would the world be better off if YOU killed somebody won the lotto? Is the world better off because bus driver John Gillen won $72 million in the megamillions last month? Is the world been better off because Jim McCullar won $190 million last month?
Excuse my skepticism, but you currently have more money than you need to survive. You're not sending THAT to Somalia right now as far as I know. Right now, what's standing between you and saving a few lives with your annual income?
Something makes me think that if you got a billion dollars for killing a person, you'd keep some of that money. If you KILL somebody to get a $100 million or $100 billion, and you keep ANY of it, it amounts to killing to enrich yourself and loved ones, then asking the stranger to spend a few billion on charity to make yourself feel better about it. Especially since, up to this point in your life, you've NOT sacrificed a lot to save those people in Somalia or wherever.
Like doing a contract murder for $100,000, then having the mafia donate a big check to St Jude's. Who are we kidding? Even if St Jude's gets a bigger check than you do, you're still a hit man.
Sure. Maybe not for less than 10,000,000. But sure. A lot of good I could do with it.
I have given MY LAST dollar to the guy on the corner. Right now I live check to check with a wife and kid. My checking account got closed a couple months back because I was $63 dollars overdrawn and couldn't afford to pay it back. Since getting laid off last april, I have had 2 temporary jobs that paid about half what I used to make.
I had TWO dollars in my pocket just the a couple weeks ago, and I handed it to a woman who was begging for rent money down the street.
I do what I can. I'm not even a christian or anything. I LOVE altruism, and wish that it was more common.
now onto the offer
(According to the OP, the Gman seeks me out and makes me the offer. I Don't naturally DESIRE to kill anyone for any amount of money)
But seriously, you are obviously trying an appeal to emotions here. Sorry but I don't buy it.
Pharmaceutical companies knowingly allow 10's-100's (sometimes even thousands) die from forseen side effects of perscription drugs all because the profits outweigh the costs of settling law suits or performing recalls.
Car manufacturers do it too.
Our governments drop bombs on people for much less.
People kill to steal $40 out of a liquor store register.
People kill to steal several thousand dollars from a bank.
People invade homes and kill the residents for silverware and TV's and a few dollars.
Some people rape and murder children for no good reason at all.
Some people drive drunk and kill others out of shear stupidity.
Some people fly planes into buildings for misguided religious beliefs.
Some people shoot their spouses just because they hate 'em.
Some people go on with their lives never thinking about the 80,000 children who die each year from starvation.
So save your righteousness for someone who has never heard of it.
I would kill the stranger, for a wish, or $100,000,000,000 either way. I'd do it in secret, in public, in front of their family whatever.
In fact, I think I'd be doing the guy (or gal) a favor by allowing them a few moments to kiss their family goodbye.
Some people get killed for completely asinine reasons and never get to say goodbye.
Villainize me if you must. But killing ONE person for a MASSIVE increase in Altruism...
Our soldiers often take bullets for a good cause. Our police and firemen often die for a good cause. Maybe one more citizen could give it a try.
Like I said, I'd glady be the stranger if it meant a huge upswing in altruism.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
I call bull☺☺☺☺ on the idea that one person's life is meaningless compared to a supposed utilitarian purpose. To consider a single person's life something that does not matter defeats all altruism.
As he said it's not a child, one could argue there's no such thing as an innocent grown-up
I would not be executing him for a crime or to serve justice. I would be killing a man for my own personal gain. Thus, the man is innocent, and were I to kill him I would be no better than any criminal who mugs someone on the street.
I call bull☺☺☺☺ on the idea that one person's life is meaningless compared to a supposed utilitarian purpose. To consider a single person's life something that does not matter defeats all altruism.
Not meaningless, but worth much less. A world of difference.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Banner and avatar by the one and only Craven at Epic graphics. Check them out.
The life of a single human means little in the grand scheme of things, as the life of any other creature on earth, despite what people may want to believe. The death of a single organism is a small tragedy at best.
If the death of an individual is of no consequence, then that reduces the fate of any group of individuals to being of no consequence. n * 0 = 0 for any number n. To justify harm against an individual in the name of the common good by reducing the value of an individual person is to reduce the value of, and justify the harming of, everyone.
Or, more poetically, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
I have given MY LAST dollar to the guy on the corner. Right now I live check to check with a wife and kid. My checking account got closed a couple months back because I was $63 dollars overdrawn and couldn't afford to pay it back. Since getting laid off last april, I have had 2 temporary jobs that paid about half what I used to make.
I had TWO dollars in my pocket just the a couple weeks ago, and I handed it to a woman who was begging for rent money down the street.
I do what I can. I'm not even a christian or anything. I LOVE altruism, and wish that it was more common.
as a Christian or non-Christian, you are probably familiar with the expression "playing God".
Well I'm sorry about your situation and the double jobs. But in the context of taking other people's lives in order to redistribute wealth: you're living in relative comfort compared to many of the world's inhabitants, and have not established a track record of altruism that shows you'd be the hit man who makes the world a Better place.
But that is tangential anyway. You wouldn't keep any of the blood money for yourself, your wife, or child, right? Because others need it more than you.
now onto the offer
(According to the OP, the Gman seeks me out and makes me the offer. I Don't naturally DESIRE to kill anyone for any amount of money
"Contract killer was never a career goal of mine, but when I saw the salary for the hitman job, it was too good an opportunity to pass up."
But seriously, you are obviously trying an appeal to emotions here. Sorry but I don't buy it.
Pharmaceutical companies knowingly allow 10's-100's (sometimes even thousands) die from forseen side effects of perscription drugs all because the profits outweigh the costs of settling law suits or performing recalls.
Car manufacturers do it too.
Our governments drop bombs on people for much less.
People kill to steal $40 out of a liquor store register.
People kill to steal several thousand dollars from a bank.
People invade homes and kill the residents for silverware and TV's and a few dollars.
Some people rape and murder children for no good reason at all.
Some people drive drunk and kill others out of shear stupidity.
Some people fly planes into buildings for misguided religious beliefs.
Some people shoot their spouses just because they hate 'em.
Some people go on with their lives never thinking about the 80,000 children who die each year from starvation.
and Pol Pot killed 21% of his country's population.
Giving me an exhaustive list of people who do awful things is not making the "hit man gig" any more appealing to me.
In fact Pol Pot killed 21% of his country's population... with the goal of creating an agrarian socialist utopia. It wasn't sadism. It was idealistic, cold blooded utilitarianism. And even if he'd somehow succeeded in his long term goal, he'd still be a monster.
So save your righteousness for someone who has never heard of it.
I would kill the stranger, for a wish, or $100,000,000,000 either way. I'd do it in secret, in public, in front of their family whatever.
In fact, I think I'd be doing the guy (or gal) a favor by allowing them a few moments to kiss their family goodbye.
Some people get killed for completely asinine reasons and never get to say goodbye.
Villainize me if you must. But killing ONE person for a MASSIVE increase in Altruism..
At its core, the hypothetical is not a "massive increase in altruism."
It is YOU believing yourself to be super-altuistic.
It is YOU becoming super-rich for murdering somebody.
It is YOU murdering somebody because YOU feel that the world would be so much better off with one more super-rich person, if that person is like you. Which is quite convincing given how perfect the world has become since Megamillions and Powerball started.
But it is you thinking you are so much more altruistic than the average, and having so much more vision than most of the newly rich, that YOU would be different.
Our soldiers often take bullets for a good cause. Our police and firemen often die for a good cause. Maybe one more citizen could give it a try.
there is a difference between volunteering for a job and being forced into slavery.
Volunteering somebody else to die for your cause is wrong. The murder victim gets no say in this hypothetical.
Be is collateral damage in your vision of a war on poverty.
Like I said, I'd glady be the stranger if it meant a huge upswing in altruism.
the fact that you'd be willing to donate all YOUR organs to save 5 lives is not justification for you kidnapping somebody and donating THEIRS.
Sure. Maybe not for less than 10,000,000. But sure. A lot of good I could do with it.
if your argument and conviction are so strong, why set the bar so high at $10 million? And I don't ask that question as an appeal to emotion. I ask because you seem quite convinced by your own altruistic argument, and the idea that money in your hands will do predictable, long term good that clearly justifies murder. Let's talk brass tacks and EXACTLY how you'd account spending the blood money.
(1) If our charitable foundation asked you to write an RFP for contract murder of that stranger for $100 million, what would you put in that RFP? No hand-waving over how $100 million > dead man. We're investing a human life and $100 million, we want to know precisely how the money will be spent.
(2) would you kill a stranger and take his winning $10 million winning lotto ticket if you knew you wouldn't be caught? Would you kill a bank teller for $100 million? How about an armored truck driver? Remember after you get the money, you're gonna "benefit the world" with it.
(3) if you'd kill 1 person for $10 million, would you kill 1000 people for $10 billion? Would you be willing to blow up the Exxon cafeteria at lunch time for $100 billion?
What makes you better than Pol Pot, or even a run of the mill terrorist if you're willing to sacrifice Innocent strangers' lives, in service of YOUR "vision"?
Do you believe AT ALL in the rule of law? Human rights? Self determination?
Every homeless person you kidnap for organ donation can save 5 lives, and restore vision to the blind. And those guys are wasting their lives right now doing nothing. Why not kill them?
After some more thought, I feel that the audacity to say "up yours" and then achieve a measure of power without killing anyone would be a far greater death blow than anything. The question I come to is the intent of the person giving the wish, who is he? What are his intentions? What's the meaning of the person being killed, does the man posses some sort of knowledge of the future that if killing the person in question would trigger a cascade result to a bad future?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
My mindset may also defeat humanism and all anthropocentrism as well, but that is besides the point. I said small tragedy. I never said life has no value.
The math is much simpler n*x > x.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Banner and avatar by the one and only Craven at Epic graphics. Check them out.
as a Christian or non-Christian, you are probably familiar with the expression "playing God".
I don't belief in one, that comparison means nothing to me.
"Playing god" to me just = "Playing ambitious and dedicated human progress"
Well I'm sorry about your situation and the double jobs. But in the context of taking other people's lives in order to redistribute wealth: you're living in relative comfort compared to many of the world's inhabitants, and have not established a track record of altruism that shows you'd be the hit man who makes the world a Better place.
I may not make things perfect, but I'm sure I could come up with some good ideas.
But that is tangential anyway. You wouldn't keep any of the blood money for yourself, your wife, or child, right? Because others need it more than you.
Sure I would, I'm not stupid. I also never said I was Jesus.
Altruistic =/= perfect
"Contract killer was never a career goal of mine, but when I saw the salary for the hitman job, it was too good an opportunity to pass up."
and Pol Pot killed 21% of his country's population.
Yes he did.
Giving me an exhaustive list of people who do awful things is not making the "hit man gig" any more appealing to me.
Not to you, but for me, it works fine. I'm not trying to convince you AT ALL to make the same choice as me.
In fact Pol Pot killed 21% of his country's population... with the goal of creating an agrarian socialist utopia. It wasn't sadism. It was idealistic, cold blooded utilitarianism. And even if he'd somehow succeeded in his long term goal, he'd still be a monster.
And maybe, if indeed his actions lead to a far greater good...no one would call him a monster.
People claim that God allows suffering for a "greater good" , and forgive him of inaction (see: Problem of Evil)
...and I'm a lowly falible human being.
At its core, the hypothetical is not a "massive increase in altruism."
It is if you account for what the hitman DOES with his wish/money
If the hitman isn't altruistic...then it could mean a huge upswing in suffering too.
It is YOU believing yourself to be super-altuistic.
I would be yes. I am already, when I can afford to be.
It is YOU becoming super-rich for murdering somebody.
Sure. And its not like Haliburton didn't get richer at the cost of Iraqi lives.
Your point?
It is YOU murdering somebody because YOU feel that the world would be so much better off with one more super-rich person, if that person is like you. Which is quite convincing given how perfect the world has become since Megamillions and Powerball started.
I feel it would be better with one more Altruistic person who had the means to do something productive with their altruism.
I know a few altruistic people who don't have a penny to their name and still volunteer at the shelter.
But it is you thinking you are so much more altruistic than the average, and having so much more vision than most of the newly rich, that YOU would be different.
I'd be richer than Bill Gates, and maybe a healthy bit more Altruistic.
there is a difference between volunteering for a job and being forced into slavery.
Point?
Volunteering somebody else to die for your cause is wrong. The murder victim gets no say in this hypothetical.
I'd die for my own cause, but that is not what the OP offered is it?
Be is collateral damage in your vision of a war on poverty.
the fact that you'd be willing to donate all YOUR organs to save 5 lives is not justification for you kidnapping somebody and donating THEIRS.
I am an organ donor, but that isn't what the OP offered is it.
if your argument and conviction are so strong, why set the bar so high at $10 million? And I don't ask that question as an appeal to emotion. I ask because you seem quite convinced by your own altruistic argument, and the idea that money in your hands will do predictable, long term good that clearly justifies murder. Let's talk brass tacks and EXACTLY how you'd account spending the blood money.
Maybe one life IS worth 10 million.
Everyday peoples are being traded for far less all over the world.
(1) If our charitable foundation asked you to write an RFP for contract murder of that stranger for $100 million, what would you put in that RFP? No hand-waving over how $100 million > dead man. We're investing a human life and $100 million, we want to know precisely how the money will be spent.
Stuff like that. I would list out EVERYTHING I would do, but that would be a 1,000 page document.
If instead of money, I got a wish...I really have to think long and hard about it. I have to make my wish in the right words so that the greater good would be the result.
(2) would you kill a stranger and take his winning $10 million winning lotto ticket if you knew you wouldn't be caught? Would you kill a bank teller for $100 million? How about an armored truck driver? Remember after you get the money, you're gonna "benefit the world" with it.
I answered this question already. I didn't LOOK for the Gman hoping I can find work as an altruistic hitman. Out of the blue I am being presented with the choice, unexpectedly. No, I have no reason to start hunting down lotto winners.
(3) if you'd kill 1 person for $10 million, would you kill 1000 people for $10 billion? Would you be willing to blow up the Exxon cafeteria at lunch time for $100 billion?
Maybe.
There are 7 billion people on the planet
1% = 70,000,000 - - 700,000 people would be 0.0001%
How many is too many for changing the world?
We have killed thousands upon THOUSANDS of people....just to spread democracy.
(or spread other ideologies)
What makes you better than Pol Pot, or even a run of the mill terrorist if you're willing to sacrifice Innocent strangers' lives, in service of YOUR "vision"?
And what would make me equal to Eisenhower, Roosevelt, or Lincoln?
Do you believe AT ALL in the rule of law? Human rights? Self determination?
Sure I do. In the real world, the rich and powerful make the laws, and rule.
Every homeless person you kidnap for organ donation can save 5 lives, and restore vision to the blind. And those guys are wasting their lives right now doing nothing. Why not kill them?
And honestly, would you keep some of the money?
Yes. But much much less than a U.S. Senator makes each year to fail at getting anything meaningful done.
Hope that helps
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
My mindset may also defeat humanism and all anthropocentrism as well, but that is besides the point. I said small tragedy. I never said life has no value.
The math is much simpler n*x > x.
Definitely some interesting replies. Some of the pointedness of the issue seems to also come down to a random stranger or killing in general.
Changing up the question a bit now (feel free to answer the original if you haven't chimed in yet), does your answer change if I change the person being killed? If the man with the briefcase told you that the person standing before you would be another Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc., and drive the world into another war with millions of casualties, would you do it? What if the person to be killed was a murderer, rapist, etc.?
At this point, you'd be "saving" lives, potentially. Now how do you feel about it? Is killing at this point killing, or preventing further killing?
-Matt
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm your Huckleberry." - Doc Holliday
"You're like the nicest person on the forum!" -Maicol
At its core, the hypothetical is not a "massive increase in altruism."
It is YOU believing yourself to be super-altuistic.
It is YOU becoming super-rich for murdering somebody.
It is YOU murdering somebody because YOU feel that the world would be so much better off with one more super-rich person, if that person is like you. Which is quite convincing given how perfect the world has become since Megamillions and Powerball started.
But it is you thinking you are so much more altruistic than the average, and having so much more vision than most of the newly rich, that YOU would be different.
Hits the nail on the head.
The core is a fundamental selfishness. Which is why I called bull☺☺☺☺ on the altruism argument. It has nothing to do with altruism at all.
It's why IcecreamMan claims he's better than everyone else, and then responds everytime someone points out his flawed statements with "I'm no better than everyone else, but whatever, everyone else is doing it."
Actually, it's a recognized psychological mechanism called "compensatory ethics". When you think you've been especially virtuous in one respect, you allow yourself to be less virtuous in others. See also ostentatious environmentalists, political protesters of any ideological stripe, and anyone who's cut themselves an extra slice of cake because they were "good today".
Why is it so hard to believe someone would do GOOD things with tons of money, or a wish??
Are you refusing to believe I would use the money for good simply because I killed one person for it??
Killing one person makes me a selfish liar??
This is not a sound argument at all.
Elton John and Bono have each donated over 100 million to their causes. http://www.ejaf.org/
Paul Newman used profits from his brand of merchandise to spend over 200 million in charitable programs around the world. http://www.newmansownfoundation.org/
Jon Bon Jovi even donated millions to the Darfur Habitat for Humanity
It's why IcecreamMan claims he's better than everyone else, and then responds everytime someone points out his flawed statements with "I'm no better than everyone else, but whatever, everyone else is doing it."
Thanks for the ad hom. Are you on some sort of personal vendetta against me? Just because I disagree with you about the "heaven" thing?? Get over yourself buddy.
I never said I was better than everyone. I am not even close to a great person.
But with 100 billion, I could and WOULD become the biggest charitable organization in the world.
Why is that so hard to believe???
Even if I only gave half (50 billion) I'd easily be the #1 most charitable person on the planet. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/charitable
If I kept 2 million for myself and my family to live on for the rest of our lives. That would leave $999,998,000,000 to work charity with. Seems pretty damn good to me.
But the truth is. I would WANT to be the most altruistic person ever. (maybe that is selfish too right?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism
It is not that much of a stretch honestly. I will only live a little while longer. I only have one life. I could go down in history as the guy who lived in middle class but poured out 1st class dollars to improve the world. They will name high schools after me.
You ever think maybe I really really want a posthumous nobel peace prize?? That'd be cool beans dude.
I think it is sadly humorous that a believer like you HighRoller cannot imagine anyone ever acting "jesuslike" if they had the opportunity to.
I don't even believe in god(s)...but being "jesuslike" is something everyone could do a little more. Love thy neighbor right.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
Why is it so hard to believe someone would do GOOD things with tons of money, or a wish??
nobody doubts that you would give some of the blood money away. They (and I) think you're lying to yourself when you call it altruism or generosity. We think it's a lie to consider it anything other than selfish.
But with 100 billion, I could and WOULD become the biggest charitable organization in the world. Why is that so hard to believe???
If I kept 2 million for myself and my family to live on for the rest of our lives. That would leave $999,998,000,000 to work charity with. Seems pretty damn good to me.
It is not that much of a stretch honestly. I will only live a little while longer. I only have one life. I could go down in history as the guy who lived in middle class but poured out 1st class dollars to improve the world. They will name high schools after me.
You ever think maybe I really really want a posthumous nobel peace prize?? That'd be cool beans dude.
your definition of altruism:
Murder an innocent man in exchange for $2 million in personal profit, anticipation of a possible Nobel peace prize, and credit for being the biggest charitable giver in history... Have high schools named after you...
Which now makes its clear why you made arguments to suggest "$100 billion= easy choice", but you were reluctant to do it for $10 million or less: nobody will recognize you with an award or give you a posthumous prize if you only give away $10 million or even $100 million.
The sad part is that you're not even really making the charitable contribution yourself. The mysterious stranger, who apparently has his own reasons for wanting the murder, is basically donating the money at your direction, and you're just talking yourself into the idea that you're altruistic:
icecreamman80:"sure I'll murder that guy. Where do I sign? And please just make the first check out to Icecreamman80 for $2 million. Then make out the five $20 billion checks to these charities... no, WAIT! Actually on second thought, make out the whole amount to me. I want to make sure the money goes in my account first. That way, when i give it away, I can get full credit from the world and history. If you write the checks, people will get the impression that you are the one giving the money to charity (plus I might change my mind and decide to keep $4 million for myself... No need to make hasty decisions about this). Woot!!! I'm gonna be famous! They're gonna name high schools after me!! Can you believe it?"
I think it is sadly humorous that a believer like you HighRoller cannot imagine anyone ever acting "jesuslike" if they had the opportunity to.
I don't even believe in god(s)...but being "jesuslike" is something everyone could do a little more. Love thy neighbor right.
ah yes... If we look at 1st Corinthians where Jesus did the contract murder by strangling the innocent stranger, bought himself a house with 2% of the money, then handed out the rest to poor people.
I never said I was better than everyone. I am not even close to a great person.
I thought you were claiming to be "Jesus-like"
Oh wait, when you said you were "Jesus-like", did you mean like Jesus Ruben Moncada, the contract killer for MS-13 or somebody like that? "Jesus" pronounced "hay-Zeus"?
For a flawed human being to do what I would do with the money would be pretty damn charitable and yes "jesuslike" compared to what many flawed humans do with money.
It's not like I would "pimp my ride" or buy myself a G6.
You moral agents are focusing on the "kill a guy" part
icecreamman80:"sure I'll murder that guy. Where do I sign? And please just make the first check out to Icecreamman80 for $2 million. Then make out the five $20 billion checks to these charities... no, WAIT! Actually on second thought, make out the whole amount to me. I want to make sure the money goes in my account first. That way, when i give it away, I can get full credit from the world and history. If you write the checks, people will get the impression that you are the one giving the money to charity (plus I might change my mind and decide to keep $4 million for myself... No need to make hasty decisions about this). Woot!!! I'm gonna be famous! They're gonna name high schools after me!! Can you believe it?"
Dcartist, don't missquote me! I didn't say it like that at all. Learn to debate properly.
*Blinks*
Did you just seriously say that you'd be completely willing to murder someone entirely for profit and personal glory and then claim you're:
1. Like Jesus
2. Loving your neighbor?
ah yes... If we look at 1st Corinthians where Jesus did the contract murder by strangling the innocent stranger, bought himself a house with 2% of the money, then handed out the rest to poor people.
"jesuslike" =/= Jesus
I'm not perfect, or the alleged son of God. If I keep 0.2%, and give away 99.8%, thats pretty "jesuslike" for a normal human being.
How is giving away 99.8% of your personal wealth to help make the world a better place selfish?
How is is NOT being charitable, and (in a way) altruistic?
You moral "agents" are focusing on the "killed a guy" part.
This is stupid, and I think it's silly that its the focus of your disdain.
What world do guys you live in??? Cause they way you talk, you certainly don't live in the real world.
How many people gave their lives drilling for oil, mining for coal, fighting communism?
How many people killed by drunk drivers, sick pedophiles, drug dealers?
How many people die from contamination leaked by major industrial manufacturers?
How many people die from faulty or outright inferior building construction?
How many people have been killed because some nutjob hates abortion?
How many people have been killed for the contents of a cash register?
How many have been killed for nothing more than religion?
You talk about how evil I must be to kill ONE guy for a huge amount of global charity...
Your religions have killed MILLIONS and continue to kill thousands every year just because they hate each for believing different things. I would need a Texas Instrument to figure out how many people have been killed for the spread of Cristianity and Catholicism in the world, and that wouldn't even be counting the people killed in order to spread democracy.
Save your sanctimonious bull☺☺☺☺ for someone who hasn't heard it ALL before.
Two-faced hypocrites.
You won't pull the trigger sure, but even though you don't, we ALL ride the backs of the war machine. We all cast our votes, and buy our gas...We are all culpable in some degree for the deaths of thousands. You think just because you don't put the gun to their heads your hands are clean?? Laughable.
If you think you can live comfy in this industrialized society and say you've got no part in the deaths of others is naive at best, and at worst WILLFULLY BLIND.
I at least have the audacity.
nobody doubts that you would give some of the blood money away. They (and I) think you're lying to yourself when you call it altruism or generosity. We think it's a lie to consider it anything other than selfish.
If I was ONLY being selfish, I would keep ALL the money.
Giving away 99.8% of it is being 0.2% selfish and 99.8% charitable. I can live with that.
However, You are right about the Altruism thing. I apologize if "pure" Altruism was the wrong choice for words. I read more on the subject of Altruism, and yes, keeping a small amount so that my wife and son don't have to starve isn't very altruistic.
Maybe it would be closer to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruism
It is a form of altruism. I give away billions of dollars to make the world a better place.
They name a high school after me. Win Win!
I think that Reciprocal Altruism is about the best a normal human being can do.
I mean, its not like Bill Gates lives in a cardboard box. He lives pretty well, and still gives away hundreds of millions to charity. He is one of the top 3 most charitable people in the world.
Jesus only gave away loaves and fishes...maybe I should say "Bill Gates-like"
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
For a flawed human being to do what I would do with the money would be pretty damn charitable and yes "jesuslike" compared to what many flawed humans do with money. It's not like I would "pimp my ride" or buy myself a G6.
(1) I think you'd spend some o that money on ☺☺☺☺ at least as frivolous as "pimping your ride"
(2) if you wanted to pimp your ride, I got no problem with it. The murder is the crime.
Quote from dcartist »
icecreamman80: "sure I'll murder that guy. Where do I sign? And please just make the first check out to Icecreamman80 for $2 million. Then make out the five $20 billion checks to these charities... no, WAIT! Actually on second thought, make out the whole amount to me. I want to make sure the money goes in my account first. That way, when i give it away, I can get full credit from the world and history. If you write the checks, people will get the impression that you are the one giving the money to charity (plus I might change my mind and decide to keep $4 million for myself... No need to make hasty decisions about this). Woot!!! I'm gonna be famous! They're gonna name high schools after me!! Can you believe it?"
Dcartist, don't missquote me! I didn't say it like that at all. Learn to debate properly.
other than the gratuitous "Woot", which part is substantively inaccurate?
"jesuslike" =/= Jesus
I'm not perfect, or the alleged son of God. If I keep 0.2%, and give away 99.8%, thats pretty "jesuslike" for a normal human being.
Its about as "Jesus-like" as murdering your uncle for the inheritance, then giving most of it to charity.
How is giving away 99.8% of your personal wealth to help make the world a better place selfish?
it wasn't really your money in the first place.
You try to claim you're better than other wealthy people because you would give away 99.8% of your wealth.
But in trying to frame it the way you do, as a guy who could have kept the money, you're only saying you're better than a guy who would kill for $100 billion and chose to keep it all. Big whoop.
How is is NOT being charitable, and (in a way) altruistic?
You moral "agents" are focusing on the "killed a guy" part.
This is stupid, and I think it's silly that its the focus of your disdain.
What world do guys you live in??? Cause the way you talk, you certainly don't live in the real world.
How many people gave their lives drilling for oil, mining for coal, fighting communism?
How many people killed by drunk drivers, sick pedophiles, drug dealers?
How many people die from contamination leaked by major industrial manufacturers?
How many people die from faulty or outright inferior building construction?
How many people have been killed because some nutjob hates abortion?
How many people have been killed for the contents of a cash register?
How many have been killed for nothing more than religion?
You talk about how evil I must be to kill ONE guy for a huge amount of global charity...
Your religions have killed MILLIONS and continue to kill thousands every year just because they hate each for believing different things. I would need a Texas Instrument to figure out how many people have been killed for the spread of Cristianity and Catholicism in the world, and that wouldn't even be counting the people killed in order to spread democracy.
Yes, you went there... Maybe you should stick to the argument at hand if you dont want to lose the one or two people left who almost take you seriously.
If I was ONLY being selfish, I would keep ALL the money.
Giving away 99.8% of it is being 0.2% selfish and 99.8% charitable. I can live with that.
Does that mean if the stranger gave you $100 billion with the stipulation you only spend it on yourself, and another $100 billion to charity, that you'd be only 50% selfish by taking the offer? Because I'm trying to work out this whole Icecreamman80 algebra of altruism.
I mean, its not like Bill Gates lives in a cardboard box. He lives pretty well, and still gives away hundreds of millions to charity. He is one of the top 3 most charitable people in the world.
he gives away his own money.
In the hypothetical, your ethical standing starts out equal to a scumbag murderer for hire who keeps $100 billion.
By then giving away 99.8% of it, congratulations, you now stand head and shoulders above that guy.
Jesus only gave away loaves and fishes...maybe I should say "Bill Gates-like"
Hahah.
Out of curiosity, in your moral system, if Bill Gates is convicted of killing a random stranger, how much money should he donate to red cross in order to get a pass on the murder? $10 million? $100 million? $1 billion? $10 billion?
If he tossed in an extra $100 billion, would he still get to keep having high schools named after him and maybe a posthumous Nobel peace prize?
There is nothing fundamentally unnatural about killing anything. Soldiers kill for money, or for their country, and people kill out of pleasure / self defense / anger all the time. I'm sure there is a moral argument against killing, but truthfully we kill millions of organisms every day, either vicariously through the pollution we produce or directly when we do something like washing our hands.
The qualms about killing humans rise only because people fear for their safety, and thus, don't want to see the killing of humans become as commonplace as the slaughter of cows, horses, dogs, cats, fish, or other life forms.
You're saying that one person is just as valuable as many people. Is that what you believe?
I'm saying that if you work on a standard that one individual life has no meaning or worth, then you have rendered every single individual in that greater group without meaning or worth. Your moral standard is without foundation.
Perhaps you (and dcartist) are right on the money scenario. Truly, it would depend on the person. Does your argument change in the wish scenarios?
Absolutely not. Nothing I would wish for is worth me murdering someone.
I'm saying that if you work on a standard that one individual life has no meaning or worth, then you have rendered every single individual in that greater group without meaning or worth. Your moral standard is without foundation.
Absolutely not. Nothing I would wish for is worth me murdering someone.
Not saying worthless.
What if we put a value on it. Say $20.
So sacrificing one $20, in order to save or improve the lives of maybe 50,000,000 people. ($1,000,000,000)
The many outweigh the life of one. In fact, our world has been working for thousands of years on that simple truth.
"You are on a space ship with 300 passengers. A madman is going to open the air lock and kill everyone on board. You have just minutes to act. You're only option is to seal off the next bulkhead. This WILL kill the madman, but save the rest of you."
There is a million scenarios you can come up with the establish the fact that the value of many outweigh the one.
So. What if you wished for World Peace (and in this case, you know it will come true) isn't THAT worth murdering one person?
When moral people refuse to budge in the face of an immoral action, then the status quo continues.
The status quo is the point here.
The whole world is full of immorality, hate, pain, war, rape, murder.
If you could rid the world of those bad things, at the cost of commiting one immoral act yourself (killing a stranger for a wish).
You wouldn't do that? You would let the world continue to have murder and rape etc. on a wide global scale just because you're too self righteous to commit one wrongful act?
Skittles.
My answer would not change.
As cruel as it may sound. Judge me all you want.
I have just ONE life to live. If I could make the whole world a better and kinder place, for the cost of me being immoral and cruel for one day...
So be it.
World Peace > My pliers and a blow torch.
(an argument can be made that many people are already being tortured out there, and we aren't even getting a better world out of it.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
Skittles.
My answer would not change.
As cruel as it may sound. Judge me all you want.
I have just ONE life to live. If I could make the whole world a better and kinder place, for the cost of me being immoral and cruel for one day...
So be it.
World Peace > My pliers and a blow torch.
(an argument can be made that many people are already being tortured out there, and we aren't even getting a better world out of it.)
Would you kill 49.9% of the world population, if that was the price to accomplish your above goal of making the world "a better and kinder place" for the remaining 50.1%?
Skittles.
My answer would not change.
As cruel as it may sound. Judge me all you want.
I have just ONE life to live. If I could make the whole world a better and kinder place, for the cost of me being immoral and cruel for one day...
So be it.
World Peace > My pliers and a blow torch.
(an argument can be made that many people are already being tortured out there, and we aren't even getting a better world out of it.)
dude, I was sort of exaggerating with the Pol Pot comparison, but I am really starting to get the impression that you'd find the comparison flattering. This plus your earlier comment.
You seem to be under the impression that he was not a bad person.. Just an unsuccessful one with maybe bad luck and poor management skills.
Ask yourself this though: can you think of a lot examples in history where a leader who simply killed off hundreds of thousands or millions of his own people against their will to create a better future for his nation, and history now looks kindly upon? Can you think of anybody who took this approach where the outcome was historically positive? Any wiser versions of Pol Pot or Stalin where the ends really did justify the means? Some Chinese, Roman, Persian, or Japanese emperor perhaps?
What makes you think that YOU will just turn out to be the one mass murderer/ torturer/sadist in history whose "harsh choices" build utopia on the foundation of innocent bones?
Would you agree that although the civil war costed over a half million lives...that a stronger Union and the promise of eventual emancipation of slaves was a WIN? *and some people argue it wasn't really to save the slaves from slavery, but more to fix voting power and economic issues*
Would you compare Lincoln to Pol Pot??
What about our soldiers. They sign up by the thousands, for pay and college tuition, to go kill other people for a "good cause" right? For democracy. To eliminate a tyrant. For oil. For some presidential vendetta.
Are our soldiers mini Pol Pots??
Also. Who the hell said I was a leader???
I'm ONE GUY killing ONE GUY for a wish (or maybe 100bil) yes, that is an immoral act.
The the resulting good done with that wish or the money outweighs one life.
I also said I'd volunteer to be the life.
Look at it this way.
If a "god" asked you to jump in a volcano, with the promise that "god" would remove cancer and war from the world. Would you?
If you would sacrifice your life for the world to be a better place (and I would) then what makes any difference wether you jump in a volcano, or someone shoots you??
WHy don't I kill myself then, you ask.
I could kill myself right now. However, it would be a senseless thing to do. Killing myself it isn't gonna fix anything, or cure cancer, or give 50 billion to charity. That's why.
If someone shot me tomorrow, it wouldn't bring world peace, or save starving children.
You could get hit by a truck tomorrow for NO good reason, with no benefit at all.
At least based on what I would choose to do with the wish/money, the stranger, or myself, would be losing their life to a positive result.
Oh, and one thing I always wanted to do. I would like to help amputees who lost limbs to war, land mines, violence, whatever. I would like to help them get the best prosthetic limbs available. I couldn't find an organization that does that but I only googled for a minute, I bet there is one out there.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
Money is pretty silly, to be honest. To actually do anything significantly substantial to improve the lives of mass quantities of people you would need more than 100 billion. There just isnt enough money in the world to help everyone, and if you had the kind of money to help save/give lots of money to millions of people, the global economy would plummet and money would be almost valueless. When there is that much money in the system, the value of your "saving" money becomes nothing.
Sure. Maybe not for less than 10,000,000. But sure. A lot of good I could do with it.
I have given MY LAST dollar to the guy on the corner. Right now I live check to check with a wife and kid. My checking account got closed a couple months back because I was $63 dollars overdrawn and couldn't afford to pay it back. Since getting laid off last april, I have had 2 temporary jobs that paid about half what I used to make.
I had TWO dollars in my pocket just the a couple weeks ago, and I handed it to a woman who was begging for rent money down the street.
I do what I can. I'm not even a christian or anything. I LOVE altruism, and wish that it was more common.
now onto the offer
(According to the OP, the Gman seeks me out and makes me the offer. I Don't naturally DESIRE to kill anyone for any amount of money)
But seriously, you are obviously trying an appeal to emotions here. Sorry but I don't buy it.
Pharmaceutical companies knowingly allow 10's-100's (sometimes even thousands) die from forseen side effects of perscription drugs all because the profits outweigh the costs of settling law suits or performing recalls.
Car manufacturers do it too.
Our governments drop bombs on people for much less.
People kill to steal $40 out of a liquor store register.
People kill to steal several thousand dollars from a bank.
People invade homes and kill the residents for silverware and TV's and a few dollars.
Some people rape and murder children for no good reason at all.
Some people drive drunk and kill others out of shear stupidity.
Some people fly planes into buildings for misguided religious beliefs.
Some people shoot their spouses just because they hate 'em.
Some people go on with their lives never thinking about the 80,000 children who die each year from starvation.
So save your righteousness for someone who has never heard of it.
I would kill the stranger, for a wish, or $100,000,000,000 either way. I'd do it in secret, in public, in front of their family whatever.
In fact, I think I'd be doing the guy (or gal) a favor by allowing them a few moments to kiss their family goodbye.
Some people get killed for completely asinine reasons and never get to say goodbye.
Villainize me if you must. But killing ONE person for a MASSIVE increase in Altruism...
Our soldiers often take bullets for a good cause. Our police and firemen often die for a good cause. Maybe one more citizen could give it a try.
Like I said, I'd glady be the stranger if it meant a huge upswing in altruism.
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
I would not be executing him for a crime or to serve justice. I would be killing a man for my own personal gain. Thus, the man is innocent, and were I to kill him I would be no better than any criminal who mugs someone on the street.
Not meaningless, but worth much less. A world of difference.
Banner and avatar by the one and only Craven at Epic graphics. Check them out.
Offical High Priest of Reign of Blood
I'm not convinced there is.
If the death of an individual is of no consequence, then that reduces the fate of any group of individuals to being of no consequence. n * 0 = 0 for any number n. To justify harm against an individual in the name of the common good by reducing the value of an individual person is to reduce the value of, and justify the harming of, everyone.
Or, more poetically, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
Your mindset defeats all altruism.
Well I'm sorry about your situation and the double jobs. But in the context of taking other people's lives in order to redistribute wealth: you're living in relative comfort compared to many of the world's inhabitants, and have not established a track record of altruism that shows you'd be the hit man who makes the world a Better place.
But that is tangential anyway. You wouldn't keep any of the blood money for yourself, your wife, or child, right? Because others need it more than you.
"Contract killer was never a career goal of mine, but when I saw the salary for the hitman job, it was too good an opportunity to pass up."
and Pol Pot killed 21% of his country's population.
Giving me an exhaustive list of people who do awful things is not making the "hit man gig" any more appealing to me.
In fact Pol Pot killed 21% of his country's population... with the goal of creating an agrarian socialist utopia. It wasn't sadism. It was idealistic, cold blooded utilitarianism. And even if he'd somehow succeeded in his long term goal, he'd still be a monster.
At its core, the hypothetical is not a "massive increase in altruism."
It is YOU believing yourself to be super-altuistic.
It is YOU becoming super-rich for murdering somebody.
It is YOU murdering somebody because YOU feel that the world would be so much better off with one more super-rich person, if that person is like you. Which is quite convincing given how perfect the world has become since Megamillions and Powerball started.
But it is you thinking you are so much more altruistic than the average, and having so much more vision than most of the newly rich, that YOU would be different.
there is a difference between volunteering for a job and being forced into slavery.
Volunteering somebody else to die for your cause is wrong. The murder victim gets no say in this hypothetical.
Be is collateral damage in your vision of a war on poverty.
the fact that you'd be willing to donate all YOUR organs to save 5 lives is not justification for you kidnapping somebody and donating THEIRS.
if your argument and conviction are so strong, why set the bar so high at $10 million? And I don't ask that question as an appeal to emotion. I ask because you seem quite convinced by your own altruistic argument, and the idea that money in your hands will do predictable, long term good that clearly justifies murder. Let's talk brass tacks and EXACTLY how you'd account spending the blood money.
(1) If our charitable foundation asked you to write an RFP for contract murder of that stranger for $100 million, what would you put in that RFP? No hand-waving over how $100 million > dead man. We're investing a human life and $100 million, we want to know precisely how the money will be spent.
(2) would you kill a stranger and take his winning $10 million winning lotto ticket if you knew you wouldn't be caught? Would you kill a bank teller for $100 million? How about an armored truck driver? Remember after you get the money, you're gonna "benefit the world" with it.
(3) if you'd kill 1 person for $10 million, would you kill 1000 people for $10 billion? Would you be willing to blow up the Exxon cafeteria at lunch time for $100 billion?
What makes you better than Pol Pot, or even a run of the mill terrorist if you're willing to sacrifice Innocent strangers' lives, in service of YOUR "vision"?
Do you believe AT ALL in the rule of law? Human rights? Self determination?
Every homeless person you kidnap for organ donation can save 5 lives, and restore vision to the blind. And those guys are wasting their lives right now doing nothing. Why not kill them?
And honestly, would you keep some of the money?
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
Individualities may form communities, but it is institutions alone that can create a nation.
Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success.
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.
My mindset may also defeat humanism and all anthropocentrism as well, but that is besides the point. I said small tragedy. I never said life has no value.
The math is much simpler n*x > x.
Banner and avatar by the one and only Craven at Epic graphics. Check them out.
Offical High Priest of Reign of Blood
Hope that helps
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
What if n is negative or a decimal?
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
Changing up the question a bit now (feel free to answer the original if you haven't chimed in yet), does your answer change if I change the person being killed? If the man with the briefcase told you that the person standing before you would be another Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc., and drive the world into another war with millions of casualties, would you do it? What if the person to be killed was a murderer, rapist, etc.?
At this point, you'd be "saving" lives, potentially. Now how do you feel about it? Is killing at this point killing, or preventing further killing?
-Matt
Legacy:
Thanks to SGT Chubbs for the sig
Hits the nail on the head.
The core is a fundamental selfishness. Which is why I called bull☺☺☺☺ on the altruism argument. It has nothing to do with altruism at all.
It's why IcecreamMan claims he's better than everyone else, and then responds everytime someone points out his flawed statements with "I'm no better than everyone else, but whatever, everyone else is doing it."
Are you refusing to believe I would use the money for good simply because I killed one person for it??
Killing one person makes me a selfish liar??
This is not a sound argument at all.
Bill and Melinda Gates donate plenty to charities and projects. Like over 300 million in charitable funding.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx
Heck, look at these rich people show some altruism, didn't even know their names before.
http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/ariel-schwartz/sustainability/stanley-and-fiona-druckenmiller-most-charitable-people-us
Elton John and Bono have each donated over 100 million to their causes.
http://www.ejaf.org/
Paul Newman used profits from his brand of merchandise to spend over 200 million in charitable programs around the world.
http://www.newmansownfoundation.org/
Michael J Fox has donated over 80 million to Parkinsons reasearch.
http://www.michaeljfox.org/
Jon Bon Jovi even donated millions to the Darfur Habitat for Humanity
Thanks for the ad hom. Are you on some sort of personal vendetta against me? Just because I disagree with you about the "heaven" thing?? Get over yourself buddy.
I never said I was better than everyone. I am not even close to a great person.
But with 100 billion, I could and WOULD become the biggest charitable organization in the world.
Why is that so hard to believe???
Even if I only gave half (50 billion) I'd easily be the #1 most charitable person on the planet.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/charitable
If I kept 2 million for myself and my family to live on for the rest of our lives. That would leave $999,998,000,000 to work charity with. Seems pretty damn good to me.
But the truth is. I would WANT to be the most altruistic person ever. (maybe that is selfish too right?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altruism
It is not that much of a stretch honestly. I will only live a little while longer. I only have one life. I could go down in history as the guy who lived in middle class but poured out 1st class dollars to improve the world. They will name high schools after me.
You ever think maybe I really really want a posthumous nobel peace prize?? That'd be cool beans dude.
I think it is sadly humorous that a believer like you HighRoller cannot imagine anyone ever acting "jesuslike" if they had the opportunity to.
I don't even believe in god(s)...but being "jesuslike" is something everyone could do a little more. Love thy neighbor right.
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
your definition of altruism:
Murder an innocent man in exchange for $2 million in personal profit, anticipation of a possible Nobel peace prize, and credit for being the biggest charitable giver in history... Have high schools named after you...
Which now makes its clear why you made arguments to suggest "$100 billion= easy choice", but you were reluctant to do it for $10 million or less: nobody will recognize you with an award or give you a posthumous prize if you only give away $10 million or even $100 million.
The sad part is that you're not even really making the charitable contribution yourself. The mysterious stranger, who apparently has his own reasons for wanting the murder, is basically donating the money at your direction, and you're just talking yourself into the idea that you're altruistic:
icecreamman80: "sure I'll murder that guy. Where do I sign? And please just make the first check out to Icecreamman80 for $2 million. Then make out the five $20 billion checks to these charities... no, WAIT! Actually on second thought, make out the whole amount to me. I want to make sure the money goes in my account first. That way, when i give it away, I can get full credit from the world and history. If you write the checks, people will get the impression that you are the one giving the money to charity (plus I might change my mind and decide to keep $4 million for myself... No need to make hasty decisions about this). Woot!!! I'm gonna be famous! They're gonna name high schools after me!! Can you believe it?"
ah yes... If we look at 1st Corinthians where Jesus did the contract murder by strangling the innocent stranger, bought himself a house with 2% of the money, then handed out the rest to poor people.
I thought you were claiming to be "Jesus-like"
Oh wait, when you said you were "Jesus-like", did you mean like Jesus Ruben Moncada, the contract killer for MS-13 or somebody like that? "Jesus" pronounced "hay-Zeus"?
*Blinks*
Did you just seriously say that you'd be completely willing to murder someone entirely for profit and personal glory and then claim you're:
1. Like Jesus
2. Loving your neighbor?
It's not like I would "pimp my ride" or buy myself a G6.
You moral agents are focusing on the "kill a guy" part
Dcartist, don't missquote me! I didn't say it like that at all. Learn to debate properly.
"jesuslike" =/= Jesus
I'm not perfect, or the alleged son of God. If I keep 0.2%, and give away 99.8%, thats pretty "jesuslike" for a normal human being.
How is giving away 99.8% of your personal wealth to help make the world a better place selfish?
How is is NOT being charitable, and (in a way) altruistic?
You moral "agents" are focusing on the "killed a guy" part.
This is stupid, and I think it's silly that its the focus of your disdain.
What world do guys you live in??? Cause they way you talk, you certainly don't live in the real world.
How many people gave their lives drilling for oil, mining for coal, fighting communism?
How many people killed by drunk drivers, sick pedophiles, drug dealers?
How many people die from contamination leaked by major industrial manufacturers?
How many people die from faulty or outright inferior building construction?
How many people have been killed because some nutjob hates abortion?
How many people have been killed for the contents of a cash register?
How many have been killed for nothing more than religion?
You talk about how evil I must be to kill ONE guy for a huge amount of global charity...
Your religions have killed MILLIONS and continue to kill thousands every year just because they hate each for believing different things. I would need a Texas Instrument to figure out how many people have been killed for the spread of Cristianity and Catholicism in the world, and that wouldn't even be counting the people killed in order to spread democracy.
Save your sanctimonious bull☺☺☺☺ for someone who hasn't heard it ALL before.
Two-faced hypocrites.
You won't pull the trigger sure, but even though you don't, we ALL ride the backs of the war machine. We all cast our votes, and buy our gas...We are all culpable in some degree for the deaths of thousands. You think just because you don't put the gun to their heads your hands are clean?? Laughable.
If you think you can live comfy in this industrialized society and say you've got no part in the deaths of others is naive at best, and at worst WILLFULLY BLIND.
I at least have the audacity.
If I was ONLY being selfish, I would keep ALL the money.
Giving away 99.8% of it is being 0.2% selfish and 99.8% charitable. I can live with that.
However, You are right about the Altruism thing. I apologize if "pure" Altruism was the wrong choice for words. I read more on the subject of Altruism, and yes, keeping a small amount so that my wife and son don't have to starve isn't very altruistic.
Maybe it would be closer to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruism
It is a form of altruism. I give away billions of dollars to make the world a better place.
They name a high school after me. Win Win!
I think that Reciprocal Altruism is about the best a normal human being can do.
I mean, its not like Bill Gates lives in a cardboard box. He lives pretty well, and still gives away hundreds of millions to charity. He is one of the top 3 most charitable people in the world.
Jesus only gave away loaves and fishes...maybe I should say "Bill Gates-like"
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
(2) if you wanted to pimp your ride, I got no problem with it. The murder is the crime.
other than the gratuitous "Woot", which part is substantively inaccurate?
Its about as "Jesus-like" as murdering your uncle for the inheritance, then giving most of it to charity.
it wasn't really your money in the first place.
You try to claim you're better than other wealthy people because you would give away 99.8% of your wealth.
But in trying to frame it the way you do, as a guy who could have kept the money, you're only saying you're better than a guy who would kill for $100 billion and chose to keep it all. Big whoop.
Yes, you went there... Maybe you should stick to the argument at hand if you dont want to lose the one or two people left who almost take you seriously.
Does that mean if the stranger gave you $100 billion with the stipulation you only spend it on yourself, and another $100 billion to charity, that you'd be only 50% selfish by taking the offer? Because I'm trying to work out this whole Icecreamman80 algebra of altruism.
he gives away his own money.
In the hypothetical, your ethical standing starts out equal to a scumbag murderer for hire who keeps $100 billion.
By then giving away 99.8% of it, congratulations, you now stand head and shoulders above that guy.
Hahah.
Out of curiosity, in your moral system, if Bill Gates is convicted of killing a random stranger, how much money should he donate to red cross in order to get a pass on the murder? $10 million? $100 million? $1 billion? $10 billion?
If he tossed in an extra $100 billion, would he still get to keep having high schools named after him and maybe a posthumous Nobel peace prize?
Troll warning.
The qualms about killing humans rise only because people fear for their safety, and thus, don't want to see the killing of humans become as commonplace as the slaughter of cows, horses, dogs, cats, fish, or other life forms.
I'm saying that if you work on a standard that one individual life has no meaning or worth, then you have rendered every single individual in that greater group without meaning or worth. Your moral standard is without foundation.
Absolutely not. Nothing I would wish for is worth me murdering someone.
Say 24 hours with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch.
I'd be curious to know if anyone's opinion would change, and if so, why.
BRGotta Get or Get GotRB
(Avatar courtesy of Heylookitsamoose)
Not saying worthless.
What if we put a value on it. Say $20.
So sacrificing one $20, in order to save or improve the lives of maybe 50,000,000 people. ($1,000,000,000)
The many outweigh the life of one. In fact, our world has been working for thousands of years on that simple truth.
"You are on a space ship with 300 passengers. A madman is going to open the air lock and kill everyone on board. You have just minutes to act. You're only option is to seal off the next bulkhead. This WILL kill the madman, but save the rest of you."
There is a million scenarios you can come up with the establish the fact that the value of many outweigh the one.
So. What if you wished for World Peace (and in this case, you know it will come true) isn't THAT worth murdering one person?
When moral people refuse to budge in the face of an immoral action, then the status quo continues.
The status quo is the point here.
The whole world is full of immorality, hate, pain, war, rape, murder.
If you could rid the world of those bad things, at the cost of commiting one immoral act yourself (killing a stranger for a wish).
You wouldn't do that? You would let the world continue to have murder and rape etc. on a wide global scale just because you're too self righteous to commit one wrongful act?
Skittles.
My answer would not change.
As cruel as it may sound. Judge me all you want.
I have just ONE life to live. If I could make the whole world a better and kinder place, for the cost of me being immoral and cruel for one day...
So be it.
World Peace > My pliers and a blow torch.
(an argument can be made that many people are already being tortured out there, and we aren't even getting a better world out of it.)
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
Would you kill 49.9% of the world population, if that was the price to accomplish your above goal of making the world "a better and kinder place" for the remaining 50.1%?
BRGotta Get or Get GotRB
(Avatar courtesy of Heylookitsamoose)
You seem to be under the impression that he was not a bad person.. Just an unsuccessful one with maybe bad luck and poor management skills.
Ask yourself this though: can you think of a lot examples in history where a leader who simply killed off hundreds of thousands or millions of his own people against their will to create a better future for his nation, and history now looks kindly upon? Can you think of anybody who took this approach where the outcome was historically positive? Any wiser versions of Pol Pot or Stalin where the ends really did justify the means? Some Chinese, Roman, Persian, or Japanese emperor perhaps?
What makes you think that YOU will just turn out to be the one mass murderer/ torturer/sadist in history whose "harsh choices" build utopia on the foundation of innocent bones?
*and some people argue it wasn't really to save the slaves from slavery, but more to fix voting power and economic issues*
Would you compare Lincoln to Pol Pot??
What about our soldiers. They sign up by the thousands, for pay and college tuition, to go kill other people for a "good cause" right? For democracy. To eliminate a tyrant. For oil. For some presidential vendetta.
Are our soldiers mini Pol Pots??
Also. Who the hell said I was a leader???
I'm ONE GUY killing ONE GUY for a wish (or maybe 100bil) yes, that is an immoral act.
The the resulting good done with that wish or the money outweighs one life.
I also said I'd volunteer to be the life.
Look at it this way.
If a "god" asked you to jump in a volcano, with the promise that "god" would remove cancer and war from the world. Would you?
If you would sacrifice your life for the world to be a better place (and I would) then what makes any difference wether you jump in a volcano, or someone shoots you??
WHy don't I kill myself then, you ask.
I could kill myself right now. However, it would be a senseless thing to do. Killing myself it isn't gonna fix anything, or cure cancer, or give 50 billion to charity. That's why.
If someone shot me tomorrow, it wouldn't bring world peace, or save starving children.
You could get hit by a truck tomorrow for NO good reason, with no benefit at all.
At least based on what I would choose to do with the wish/money, the stranger, or myself, would be losing their life to a positive result.
Oh, and one thing I always wanted to do. I would like to help amputees who lost limbs to war, land mines, violence, whatever. I would like to help them get the best prosthetic limbs available. I couldn't find an organization that does that but I only googled for a minute, I bet there is one out there.
Thanks to Xenphire @ Inkfox for the amazing new sig
“Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by slight ligaments
are we bound to prosperity and ruin.”
― Mary Shelley, Frankenstein
With that mindset:
No
Yes
No