Charlie will answer any question about anything.

[Spartan-117]

ahha
*murrs*

[Orangey]

Why is any given system of ethics superior to or more correct than any other one? What is the essential nature of right and wrong?

[Mystery Fish]

Orangey! Haven't seen you around for a while.
>_>
<_<

[Pieman]

Right and wrong are merely affected by the person judging the actions, whether it's a police officer, or the person actually doing the act. The justice systems are there to give a specific view on ethicality to prevent arguments on the matter. Some people will see it as perfect, some see it as pointless, it all depends on the person.

[Charlie]

Why are we?  Because we are.

There are numerous systems of ethics, and each has it's own merits and flaws.  The four broad categories generally used are deontology, consequentialism, principalism and virtue ethics.  Deontology involves veiwing everything in black and white, and is often based on religious principles.  Consequentialism is based purely on outcomes, so basically the Machiavellian ideal that "The end justifies the means." Principalism means making decisions by weighing up several general rules, which at least in medicine are autonomy(letting people make their own choices), benificence(doing the best you can by people), non-malificence(making sure benefit outweighs harm) and justice(treating everyone equally).  Virtue ethics is the most vague, and means making decisions based on traditional virtues like honesty, compassion etc.  There is no universal "right and wrong," merely different interpretations based on an individuals ethical code.  That said, principalism is generally agreed to be the most fair system of ethics, and people are more likely to view your decisions as wrong if you only justify them by deontology or consequentialism.

Yeah, I'm writing a 2000 word essay on ethics at the moment, so that was a snap.

[the Scarf]

I have a question!
If this thread is called "Charlie will answer any question about anything." Then why do OTHER people keep answering questions?

[Pieman]

Because it's not "Only Charlie will answer any question about anything." He still answers, but it doesn't say that other people can't.

[Mystery Fish]

Why are you writing a 2,000 word essay on ethics? Is it a University assignment?

[Charlie]

Hah, there you go, I didn't think Pieman actually had any reason for answering other that "Because I have an answer" but that was really quite a good justification.  Kudos. 

Yes, my ethics essay is a part of my Foundations of Clinical Practice unit.  I'm a med student.  Apparently we need to know how to act ethically.

[Orangey]

Principalism? don't make me laugh. Consequentialism all the way, baby. The concept of individual rights is laughable.

That said, get the fruit away from mine. Yours are the laughable ones.

[Silfedac]

Ooh, an essay on ethics? Excellent. Ethical conundrum time! (Open to anyone, BTW.)

You are the minority in a healthy bout of ethnic cleansing, but have managed to procure a relatively safe hiding place. Unfortunately, one of the people sharing the shelter with you is an orphaned baby, and its crying is threatening to give you away. There is only one way to stop it: By killing it.
Could you do it?

What if the baby's parents were there? Could you kill it then?

What if it was yours?

[Mystery Fish]

1) I could. But I wouldn't.

2) Definitely not.

3) Never.

"Could" being used to denote that I could do it physically, not mentally. But only if I couldn't find any other way to quiet it, and even then, I doubt that I actually would. That's like kicking a kitten. A nice kitten. And if the baby's parents were there, I wouldn't. Because that's like kicking your friend's nice kitten. And if it were my own? Of course not. That's like... Well, killing your own child. Or kicking your own nice kitten. Take your pick.


Charlie: Paper or plastic?

[Charlie]

There is almost never "Only one way to solve the problem." I'd try to calm the baby, if it relaxes it won't scream.  If that fails, make a gag out of a scrap of cloth. 

Mind you, based on the question as asked, then I'd consider it this way: If the baby was an orphan, and I could not silence it, then I would kill it.  If I don't, both the baby and myself and anyone else in the shelter will die, and if I do only the baby will die.  I'm not saying I wouldn't feel guilty, but by consequentialism, it's the right thing to do.  "Thou shalt not kill" can be twisted, because not killing the baby is effectively suicide, just as bad, so deontology fails to stop me.  Can't really be justified by principalism or virtue ethics, but as previously stated, those are lame.

Harder if the kid's parents are there.  I'd plead the case, I'd tell them to get the kid to shut up, but if they refused to let me kill the baby and couldn't silence it, then all I'd do is hide deeper in the shelter, and hope that when they're discovered that the bad guys think they've caught everyone before they get to me.  I would not kill a child in front of his own parents.

My own kid?  My paternal instincts would manifest in a rage of superhuman strength: I would bust out of that shelter, fight my way out of the city, out of the country, and live peacefully to the end of my days.  But seriously, I don't know.


Paper or plastic what? Money?  Well, bank cards are harder for the crook to use than cash if they get stolen.  Just about anything else, paper, it's biodegradable.  If you mean shopping bags, most shops around here only offer plastic, so I don't get the choice.

[Orangey]

1) Yes
2) Yes (but try to make them do it themselves)
3) Yes

I'm a firm believer in 'sin by numbers'. By not taking action against a situation that will lead us all to death, I'm partially guilty for the deaths of both myself and the other people. The good of the majority should always precede the rights of the individual; if it were somehow me that would give the hiding-spot away, I would kill myself.

Besides, if the kid was an orphan, I don't think that his parents being there would influence my decision much. They're dead.

[Mystery Fish]

Oh, yeah. *Headsmack'd*

[Charlie]

I just assumed there were three scenarios: an orphan, someone else's kid, your kid.  At least, that way makes sense. 

Though I guess it could be the child of those other people, but they don't know about it.  Likewise, your own illegitimate child from that drunken night in Vegas who you never knew existed.  Still, if it's your kid but you don't know it, it's not really going to influence your decision much, am I right?

[the Scarf]

Really though, even if it's an orphan, it's there with SOMEBODY right? so let's just assume they're the surrogate parents....

Oh, and about the paper/plastic thing, I choose option 3. Cloth. My family has several large cloth bags to carry groceries in, and when we do get bags from the store, they get used to line trash cans (paper, not plastic)

[Orangey]

We'dhippie dohippie thathippie, but having paper bags is so useful.hippie

[Silfedac]

Me and the other members of my family are complete eco-jerks, so we use plastic grocery bags for everything in addition to not recycling.

Take that, environment!

[Spartan-117]

i seem to be the only one, but i dont know why im mega scared of global warming O_O'

[DomanickX]

I like global warming. In fact, I hope it gets here faster. The penguins wont have any place to live. Ha!

Take that penguins!

[Pieman]

BUT THE HEAT!!

Aw well, an ice age will come after that.

[Spartan-117]

=O
i love penguins you fool!
they happen to be my favourite animal
apart from raccoons
OBV
and my favourite folms of all time are happy feet
and surfs up
what a coincidence

[Pieman]

Yh, Penguins are great! Thats the second best thing about the resulting Ice age.

[Torg]

Yes, but we measure stuff in relation to ourselves. As the universe expands, so do we, therefore it is a constant size at the same time as expanding.

Also, the universe is a 3-dimentional plane around a 4-dimentional sphere, so it is infinitely big while having set dimentions.

In conclusion, due to the complicatedness of it all, Don't ask.

I realize this is going back a bit, but no one addressed this.
We are not expanding yet. Or if we are, the rest of the universe is expanding faster. Universal expansion is not the expansion of everything in the universe; in fact, the only observable effect so far is that the empty space between galaxies is expanding.

And on the current subject, I like penguins, but I hate polar bears. It's hard to decide how to feel about global warming.

[Silfedac]

New question. Why don't we have more people of differing ethnicities on the forum? As far as I know, all of us are white.

[Torg]

Why do you expect us white people to know why no one else uses the forums?
How can you tell whether or not someone is white from the forums?

[Mystery Fish]

I'm mixed race.
Indian/British/Irish.

[Pieman]

100% English.

25% Welsh

5% Scottish.

130% pieman.

Possibly part Irish or french.

My cousin Is all that, inc. South African.

[Silfedac]

I am:

• 50% Czech
• 25% Irish
• 10% German
• 10% English
• 5% Scottish

Also, Torg, I said:

New question. Why don't we have more people of differing ethnicities on the forum? As far as I know, all of us are white.