Poll: Moral Dilemma: Kill Which Father?

[TheDrunkNinja]

...where to start..?

1. (Most important point to me) The question ignores concerns of repercussions for the proposed actions, the plausibility of the proposed actions, and any attempt at deep thought concerning the situation. That alone makes it intellectually bankrupt in my mind.

2. I have no emotional connection to Phillip or Daniel, and nothing substantial in common with the kid in the story. I don't know how the kid would react, and I can't say how "I would react in the kid's place" because if I were in that kid's place, I wouldn't be me; the events that shaped my personality wouldn't have happened.

The repercussions are as you will make of them, the morality of each choice being key. Plausibility goes back to your logic, and your attempts at trying to "solve" a question of moral ambiguity. And you never explained why deep thought is being ignored, despite the fact that the entire point was to see a reflection of your own morals based on your answer which results from contemplation of oneself and deep thought.

In the beginning, I made it clear the reader was stepping into the shoes of the kid. You are Billy. I gave as much information regarding the two fathers as I could, attempting to represent each with the same level of sympathetic and unsympathetic character qualities as necessary. I understand how that isn't always enough to derive an emotional connection to a character, but I can't write a book in a forum post. You understand.

If you feel like there isn't any intellectual value within my question, I didn't mean for it to be seen that way. I haven't gotten that reaction from anybody else. Sorry you couldn't take anything away from this experience.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

That aside, I voted for "do nothing" (even though realistically I would do -something-) because I am never ethically justified in taking either of their lives, nor could I judge the situation by an unknowable chance that they might actually kill eachother. Regardless, it's not my place to decide that one of them should die.

Now, that paints a clear picture to me about your morality and ethics, as well as how you handle each in your life. Thanks for taking the time out for a little moral contemplation.

 

[TWRule]

That aside, I voted for "do nothing" (even though realistically I would do -something-) because I am never ethically justified in taking either of their lives, nor could I judge the situation by an unknowable chance that they might actually kill eachother. Regardless, it's not my place to decide that one of them should die.

Now, that paints a clear picture to me about your morality and ethics, as well as how you handle each in your life. Thanks for taking the time out for a little moral contemplation.

Really? I would hope not; just about every ethical system says don't kill other humans needlessly. Without knowing what my decision was based on you know almost nothing about my ethics or morality.

 

[Lyx]

What others do to each other is their decision, not mine, unless the situation is that i am supporting a trusted associate against an enemy (plus some other premises). In this case, the situation is that two associates of me fight each other for reasons that are not my business.

I will not stop them from doing what they want to do. I may have something to say about the matter (and perhaps enforce this "stating my opinion" by making use of the gun in a non-lethal way), but i will never decide FOR them. If i'd do that, i wouldn't deserve either of them - in fact, i probably wouldn't even deserve deciding about my own life. The decision is additionally made easy for me, because i consider the whole scenario utterly stupid - i'm not a proponent of "mental ownership" and thus monogamy - as a result, the whole conflict between them is stupid in my eyes, and they thus are themselves responsible for the situation.

So, clearly third option for me, even if the outcome may be that i'll lose both.

P.S.: Actually, "apathy" doesn't describe my position. I'm not apathic - i just refuse to decide for them. This leaves open having an own opinion - just not enforcing it against their will.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

Really? I would hope not; just about every ethical system says don't kill other humans needlessly. Without knowing what my decision was based on you know almost nothing about my ethics or morality.

You would think so. Anyone will say "killing is bad". What we do outward doesn't always reflect our inward, even if we don't fully realized it. In the revenge plot, many people will have the desire for the revenge to be enacted, others will see the protagonist on a self-destructing path. Even so, in the back of their minds, there might be a part of them focused on the justice in the act. The black and white seems in place, but there are far too many factors to stand on either side.

Also, I meant regarding this certain case. I thought you presented your stance well. It's not your place to "play god". But like I said, and like you alluded to, there's that possibility of many more factors in your answer that I couldn't even considered. After all, this was a self-reflection for you, not for me or anybody else.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I fire the gun into the air and demand that they act like adults.
Murder in cold blood is never mandatory.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I call their attention to the weapon and threaten to shoot them both if they don't stop...

<__>

What?

Sounds sensible to me: Negotiations and peace at gunpoint is better than the two men killing each other in the back yard.

Before I give my answer, I pictured this story in black and white and, taking place in the 1930's or so. The pistol being flintlock for whatever reason. Yay antiquity!

Anyway what I would do is take the gun fire into the air and then leave. I've grown up with the support of two fathers and it sounds like I'd be at an age where I could have moved on before this conflict escalated to this level. I would thank both men, turn with the gun and leave. I would likely sell/pawn the gun for travel money.

 

[I Max95]

id shoot phillip
you dont get something by right you have to earn it
Daniel worked at it and got it he had no reason to start that fight
so i deduce that Phillip brought the gun

though realistically id just shoot him in the foot or maybe the shoulder if worst came to worse

 

[rubinigosa]

well I would have shot Philip because even if he is my dad the only way he have been apart of my family is trough letters and he dose not visit very often. Making Daniel my adoptive father from the beginning.That have been their to raise me,so in this hypothetical situation I would have killed my biological father. But if it was a real situation I would first draw their attention to the gun and then threaten to shot me if they will not stop fighting. Or some other weird thing.

 

[The Wykydtron]

Hmm apathy i think, if only because i've never seen my dad so i can't really choose.