First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next  Last
Heinz Dilemma
29425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/11/13

kvi wrote:

Yes, the drug can be remade, the life cannot.

There's also this, we have responsibilities to ourselves, to our families, to our communities and to other people. Based on where you grow up these responsibilities can be placed in a different hierarchies. For example, mostly in the US and other individual centered cultures, those responsibilities follow the order above. Going closer to a community based culture, you see almost the reverse order except responsibilities to a stranger will almost always be last in the order.

So you can look at it as Hein's responsibility to his wife vs his responsibility to the owner of the drug.


So why should you prioritize these responsibilities? Why do you think that the wife is more important than the owner?
2351 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 3/11/13
Well if the drug owner was ever in a life-threatening situation that he couldn't buy his way out of, I'm sure he'd want someone to steal for him, if that's what it came to.
3378 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pandemonium
Online
Posted 3/11/13

lordseth23 wrote:


kvi wrote:

Yes, the drug can be remade, the life cannot.

There's also this, we have responsibilities to ourselves, to our families, to our communities and to other people. Based on where you grow up these responsibilities can be placed in a different hierarchies. For example, mostly in the US and other individual centered cultures, those responsibilities follow the order above. Going closer to a community based culture, you see almost the reverse order except responsibilities to a stranger will almost always be last in the order.

So you can look at it as Hein's responsibility to his wife vs his responsibility to the owner of the drug.


So why should you prioritize these responsibilities? Why do you think that the wife is more important than the owner?


Because the owner doesn't die from having it stolen from him.
29425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/11/13

Syndicaidramon wrote:


Because the owner doesn't die from having it stolen from him.


So, you insist that he should be a slave to society and not get paid for the work that he does?
3378 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pandemonium
Online
Posted 3/11/13

lordseth23 wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:


Because the owner doesn't die from having it stolen from him.


So, you insist that he should be a slave to society and not get paid for the work that he does?


No. He can get paid after the wife's life has been saved.
29425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/11/13

Syndicaidramon wrote:

No. He can get paid after the wife's life has been saved.


But that is not the situation presented in the thread. It specifically said stolen, not purchased on credit.
3378 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pandemonium
Online
Posted 3/11/13

lordseth23 wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:

No. He can get paid after the wife's life has been saved.


But that is not the situation presented in the thread. It specifically said stolen, not purchased on credit.


Yes. But that doesn't mean it can't be compensated in any other form what so ever.
29425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/11/13

Syndicaidramon wrote:


Yes. But that doesn't mean it can't be compensated in any other form what so ever.


So why can't you agree to a form of compensation instead of committing the crime?
3378 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pandemonium
Online
Posted 3/11/13 , edited 3/11/13

lordseth23 wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:


Yes. But that doesn't mean it can't be compensated in any other form what so ever.


So why can't you agree to a form of compensation instead of committing the crime?


Ask the owner. I'm sure the husband was willing to do so.
29425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/11/13 , edited 3/11/13

Syndicaidramon wrote:

Ask the owner. I'm sure the husband was willing to do so.


If the husband was willing to do so, he would have never committed the crime in the first place. Just because you can't come to an agreement in a limited amount of time does not mean you should inflict harm on others.
kvi 
50452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Planet Mars
Offline
Posted 3/11/13 , edited 3/11/13
So that's two questions, first why prioritise (keyboard). And why do I feel the wife is more important than the owner.

Let's start with the second one since it's easier. You can base my answer mostly on one thing. I am a selfish person (I'm not sure, but i think Maslow wrote something about this). I will more often do things that result in favorable outcomes to myself than do things that produce unfavorable outcomes. So the problem becomes a choice of either stealing the medicine and hurting the owner vs not stealing the medicine and hurting my wife. Since my relationship with my wife would be stronger than my relationship with some other member of my community, harming my wife will cause me more pain than harming the owner.

That's my answer based on two things,
1. That my options are either to steal or not to steal with no other options available.
2. Not stealing is almost the same as causing harm to my wife. This is my own personal reasoning on it, and if you can't understand that then this explanation isn't going to make sense to you.

As for why prioritise. Sometimes circumstances create conditions where choices have to be made that won't benefit all parties involved. In situations like this we often are forced to choose what we determine to be the 'lesser evil'. (>_>; That sounds really preachy...) The decisions have consequences, only by prioritising them can compare the outcomes and weigh them against each other.
3378 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pandemonium
Online
Posted 3/11/13

lordseth23 wrote:


Syndicaidramon wrote:

Ask the owner. I'm sure the husband was willing to do so.


If the husband was willing to do so, he would have never committed the crime in the first place. Just because you can't come to an agreement in a limited amount of time does not mean you should inflict harm on others.


If he had exorted all possibilities he could think of besides theft (which I would assume he had, seeing how desperate he was), then yes. He would commit the crime.
And yes, in this instance it DOES mean he should inflict harm upon the owner. The harm inflicted on the owner can be restored/healed/whatever. The harm done to his wife, namely death, can NOT be healed.
29425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/11/13

kvi wrote:

So that's two questions, first why prioritise (keyboard). And why do I feel the wife is more important than the owner.

Let's start with the second one since it's easier. You can base my answer mostly on one thing. I am a selfish person (I'm not sure, but i think Maslow wrote something about this). I will more often do things that result in favorable outcomes to myself than do things that produce unfavorable outcomes. So the problem becomes a choice of either stealing the medicine and hurting the owner vs not stealing the medicine and hurting my wife. Since my relationship with my wife would be stronger than my relationship with some other member of my community, harming my wife will cause me more pain than harming the owner.

That's my answer based on two things,
1. That my options are either to steal or not to steal with no other options available.
2. Not stealing is almost the same as causing harm to my wife. This is my own personal reasoning on it, and if you can't understand that then this explanation isn't going to make sense to you.

As for why prioritise. Sometimes circumstances create conditions where choices have to be made that won't benefit all parties involved. In situations like this we often are forced to choose what we determine to be the 'lesser evil'. (>_>; That sounds really preachy...) The decisions have consequences, only by prioritising them can compare the outcomes and weigh them against each other.


Why do you choose to be selfish?
Here, enslave me, I will gladly give you anything you want, just don't steal from others.

If there is a circumstance where the choices won't benefit all parties involved, you shouldn't act at all and refrain from making any choices.
kvi 
50452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Planet Mars
Offline
Posted 3/11/13
Inactivity is a choice all it's own. Like I said, if you can't understand that by doing nothing I am hurting my wife in this scenario, then you will not understand. As for why be selfish. Everything that lives in this world is selfish to a degree.

And as for the submissive remark, I really really hope you're not serious about that. There are some seriously warped individuals who would abuse submissive people without an ounce of remorse.
29425 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Hughesville, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/11/13

kvi wrote:

Inactivity is a choice all it's own. Like I said, if you can't understand that by doing nothing I am hurting my wife in this scenario, then you will not understand. As for why be selfish. Everything that lives in this world is selfish to a degree.

And as for the submissive remark, I really really hope you're not serious about that. There are some seriously warped individuals who would abuse submissive people without an ounce of remorse.


So why do you choose to be selfish to such a degree that you are using people (the pharmacist) as a means to an end instead of an end to a means? Why should you hurt the pharmacist at all? What makes you think that you are not a seriously warped individual yourself who basks in the immorality of narcissism?
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.