xoder: (Default)
[personal profile] 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.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-15 09:36 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] allilicious.livejournal.com
that's a very philosophical question, that requires much thinkage.

was this a plant?

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-15 09:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] 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.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-15 10:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ladyravn.livejournal.com
That depends on whether or not you think a magazine can suffer.

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-15 11:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] silvershura.livejournal.com
are you torturing small animals again? Shooting pellets at squirls? Stringing poor stray kittens up by the tail?

(no subject)

Date: 2004-09-16 09:58 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] 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?

Date: 2004-09-16 10:07 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] alexatrit.livejournal.com
Was it healthy when I passed it?

Page generated Dec. 27th, 2025 11:23 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios