Could you do this for the price of world peace?

[Right Hook]

I'd do it in theory, could I physically do it? Part of me hopes I couldn't. Anyway it is just one life, regardless of whether they live (probably with some sort of psychological damage) or die from the torture, plenty of babies die as a result of warfare, it would be an atrocity to not do this in all honesty. I'm not sure how bad this would mess me up but it would be worth it for the greater good. There really is no right or wrong answer here though, it is all about your own personal perception.

The girl in the video is a complete dumbass though and ruins any of the creditably she had when she says she'd be willing to torture up to 500 babies but not one puppy, what a fucking twat, I like animals but these people who are so overly obsessed with them have some serious mental deficiencies.

 

[VoidWanderer]

Could I? Yes.

Would I? No. While World Peace is a nice dream, that is all it will remain due to two main reasons. Money and Religions. Everyone wants/needs money, and they need/want more, and are willing to do whatever it takes to do so.

Religions... LONG explanation will not be typed in, as I have work in a couple of hours. But bluntly. One or None. My choice would be the latter. Less arguements.

 

[F4LL3N]

I'm not sure. If the question specified an adult, then I wouldn't second guess it. I'd expect that adult to happily accept the torture, too.

Hmm. I guess I would do it to a baby, but only because it would mean millions more innocent babies survive and live happily. Only based on the question, with no hidden clauses. And I'd be sure, if the baby survived, to dedicate my life to helping him/her. If the baby died, I'd proabably kill myself. Not because of guilt or shame, though, but simply because that's how life works for me.

If the question were, "Would you torture a baby to end adult suffering?" I would answer no. Adult suffering is caused by adults. No innocent child should suffer for everyone elses mistakes and stupidity (EDIT: Excluding my original answer which sees a child suffer for everyone elses mistakes and stupidity.)

I didn't watch the video.

 

[Owen Robertson]

I am going to have to say no. Now now my reasoning is that I actually think world peace would cause the world to be a really boring place. We need all the strife and wars around the world to keep us entertained and the population in check.

Epic win.

At OP this is like the "Nazi Europe: Could you kill a crying baby to save a family of hiding jews?" thing a lot of ethicists ask.

I think I could but you really don't know until it happens. I'd like to believe I could kill someone if it came down to it, but I'm not sure. Gun? No problem. Knife? Maybe. Blunt object? Fuck, I hope not.

 

[Owen Robertson]

Could I? Yes.

Would I? No. While World Peace is a nice dream, that is all it will remain due to two main reasons. Money and Religions. Everyone wants/needs money, and they need/want more, and are willing to do whatever it takes to do so.

Religions... LONG explanation will not be typed in, as I have work in a couple of hours. But bluntly. One or None. My choice would be the latter. Less arguements.

Waaaaaaaaaaay too oversimplified. Inherent human evil is probably the idea you're looking for. You can't just blame religion and money without being attacked by zealots and capitalists, as an atheist and a communist.

 

[Owen Robertson]

Yeah, because otherwise there'll be lots more people getting tortured.

Oh what the hey, I'll be honest: I wouldn't be able to even though I would consider it to be the right thing to do.

*Guy from the civilian ferry in Dark Knight* "None of you are willing to get your hands dirty? Fine. I'll do it myself."

 

[VoidWanderer]

Could I? Yes.

Would I? No. While World Peace is a nice dream, that is all it will remain due to two main reasons. Money and Religions. Everyone wants/needs money, and they need/want more, and are willing to do whatever it takes to do so.

Religions... LONG explanation will not be typed in, as I have work in a couple of hours. But bluntly. One or None. My choice would be the latter. Less arguements.

Waaaaaaaaaaay too oversimplified. Inherent human evil is probably the idea you're looking for. You can't just blame religion and money without being attacked by zealots and capitalists, as an atheist and a communist.

Inherent human evil = crime.

'My religion is right and you are wrong' holds humanity back more than the little whisperings in your mind, and glimpses out of the corner of your eye. Humans are not inherently evil, the fact we survived as cavemen supports that, in my opinion anyway.

 

[Risingblade]

I don't want to live in a world where torturing a baby brings peaces, what kind of sick twisted place would that be...

 

[Risingblade]

I don't want to live in a world where torturing a baby brings peaces, what kind of sick twisted place would that be...

What if you had to torture a baby to make the world be a place where torturing babies does not bring peace? =O

I'd torture you instead because my peace of mind > than world peace

 

[Blobpie]

Torcher the baby hands down!
Want to know what i would do? I would ignore it, and make it feel bad; you didn't tell me i have to inflict physical pain on it did you?
Ha ha ha, i love loopholes.

 

[Panda Mania]

Grudgingly yes, assuming there wasn't any silly catches or get-out-clauses for the world peace. As terrible as it would be for the baby, it would be worth the thousands of other children's lives saved from excessive pain and death and of-course the adults too. War is an absolute destroyer of economy and liveihoods too so with all war out of the way, Africa might finally have a chance to start digging itself out of the very deep hole it's in. If there was an alternate to torturing the baby though, like having myself tortured for example, I'd take that instead.

*salutes* Then you, good sir/madam, possess more integrity than most. People like me can only squirm and offer up pathetic reasons like moral discomfort for the baby, and sheer selfish cowardliness for one's own body. Some might call yours a cold logic; I say it's logic at its most humanistic. /sincerity mode

 

[Nouw]

Define world peace first, then let's talk.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

And we are now hypothetically torturing babies for world peace, much as we metaphorically fuck for virginity. Jonathan Swift would be proud. And Satire in 3

2

1

Spoiler: Satire Abound!

You can skip to about 1:00 in, the intro music is a bit long

 

[217not237]

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Yes, I would.

 

[applesandoranges]

edit

 

[Wintermoot]

world peace isn't going to last forever so no.