Question of the Day

[xoder]

Is prolonging the suffering of something¹ morally equivalent to killing it?
What about if when you were handed it, it was perfectly healthy.

¹ Please note the use of "something", rather than "someone". This is a living fiction, not a person.

Comments

[allilicious.livejournal.com]

that's a very philosophical question, that requires much thinkage.

was this a plant?

[xoder.livejournal.com]

Not a plant. A magazine.

[tenthz.livejournal.com]

No, it is worse. Especially since it sounds like death would have been better so this something could have been put out of it's misery.

[ladyravn.livejournal.com]

That depends on whether or not you think a magazine can suffer.

[silvershura.livejournal.com]

are you torturing small animals again? Shooting pellets at squirls? Stringing poor stray kittens up by the tail?

[llipschutz.livejournal.com]

No, the prolonging of suffering is not always morally equivalent to killing it. But by some standars, especially considering it's current conditions vs. how it would be "dead", prolonging the suffering may be WORSE than killing it.

Of course, I could also be completely wrong.


::shiny object::

Are you out?

[alexatrit.livejournal.com]

Was it healthy when I passed it?

I'm still in. I just don't know if I'm doing any good.

[xoder.livejournal.com]

It felt healthier than it does now. It might just be that I'm not getting enough sleep, though :-)