What is humanity?

[Firstmark_Bannor]

Since the release of Deus ex, I have seen several topics come up for discussion concerning morals. Most notably "should death row inmates be used for experiments?" with the over-whelming answer to that being no, I'm curious as to why people would think it isn't ok. The simple fact is human rights and morals are both human constructs, As such they shift and change much like the tides, so much so that they can hardly be said to exist at all. If 500 people could be killed for the benefit of 500 million, wouldn't the moral thing be to kill them? Now to be fair both good and evil are also human inventions and have no bearing on reality, I would say this, Do not confuse evil intentions with evil actions. Human experiments are not inherently good or evil, they are simply an avenue of progress. Good or evil, That depends on your personal rose colored glasses.

 

[Seishisha]

This reminds me greatly of another moral dillema, "your in a burning building and you hear somone in need of help, do you risk your own life to help them or ignore the cries and exit the building" there isnt realy a right or wrong choice atleast in my opinion it comes down more to what the most noble action is, which ofcourse would be to help your fellow man despite the danger.

As for saying good and evil have no bearing on reality, this i find some argument with, you could argue that a man killing people is "evil" and since they are now dead it effects the world around you and them. Likewise a man donating money to charity is a "good" act and helps fund research which could effect the lives of everyone.

Those are both examples of good and evil having a noticible effect on the lives of others. The concept of good and evil on the other hand is entirley different from the acts with which we assciate them but thats alot of introspective thinking and philosphy which im frankly not qualified to even try and comment on.

 

[Amphoteric]

I don't think it is okay to test on humans against their will because I have empathy.

 

[Comando96]

Just to confuse this situation further.

As for saying good and evil have no bearing on reality, this i find some argument with, you could argue that a man killing people is "evil" and since they are now dead it effects the world around you and them.

You fail to kill a man who takes 5 hostages, while robbing a bank and then in the next 6 days he kills an additional 30. Killing him would have been preferable.

Likewise a man donating money to charity is a "good" act and helps fund research which could effect the lives of everyone.

You Donate money to a Charity who works in Africa in order to help starving African children. 6 months later you hear about a war created and funded only made possible by stolen aid donated to the country. Would it have been better to donate to area's that were not in dire turmoil, like you said, research?

------------------------

What is moral and immoral is simply what isn't immoral or moral.

 

[smearyllama]

A dirty pile of secrets, according to Dracula, to answer you question.

OT: People shouldn't be sacrificed for the benefit of others.
If you're trying to help humanity, you need to start small, in my opinion.

 

[Nieroshai]

The biggest error I can find here is that you're asking a whole forum full of people with different worldviews an honest question, then saying they HAVE to hold your worldview as the standard of discussion. I do not hold that morality is arbitrary. Outside of religion, I could give you a multitude of Socratic arguments as well that there are such things as good and evil. But this isn't the thread for it, so on to the topic.

Sacrificing others for the greater good is a difficult thing to do objectively. What is the greater good, first of all? Humanity's safety? Humanity's happiness? Humanity's ultimate well-being? The earth's ultimate well-being whether humans are part of the picture or not? Your government's view of what the greater good is? No one can truly be trusted to decide what the greater good is, since everyone thinks they have all the answers. Ultimately, the aim should be to do the ggreatest amount of good, while also doing the absolute least harm possible. In the prisoner example, especially since so few Death Row inmates actually get killed at all, why kill or mutilate them if there's another way to do it? And you could say there is no other way to do it, but there's always the huge chance you're wrong either because you missed something or because you're ignoring something.

 

[Berethond]

What it means to be human is an incredibly complex question, that doesn't really have an answer.
I mean, my Anthropology professor says that the reason she started doing Anthro in the first place was to answer the question, "What does it mean to be human in all times and places?" and she says she doesn't have a good answer yet.

But doing dangerous experiments on death row inmates against their will? No. Just no. I don't trust anyone with that much power.