[11 / 1 / ?]
Quoted By: >>7278602
Hello /lit/
I have a proposition for you. I've been thinking about this because it bothered me a few weeks ago I was on here and I saw people arguing for subjective morality. the thought experiment is as follows:
You pass a well, such as the one pictured, but this one has a winch attached to it. assume a man has fallen into the well, and is stuck at the bottom. the well is in a somewhat obscure place, and people rarely pass it by chance. but luckily for him, you've come along. imagine that you can easily crank the winch and lift the man up and he survives. all you must do, is crank the winch. saves the day.
the thought experiment, is basically that if you saved the man, no explanation is required. but imagine you don't, you pass the well by and ignore the soon to be victim at the bottom. he has a paper and pen, and writes your name and his story. the letter is found months later along with his remains.
the point is, people would DEMAND AN EXPLANATION. the man was innocent, he did nothing to you, he was not dangerous or a menace to society. society however, would absolutely require a REASON why you DIDN'T save the man, whereas if you DID, no explanation is required. this to me is very important, to me this means something.
thoughts?
I have a proposition for you. I've been thinking about this because it bothered me a few weeks ago I was on here and I saw people arguing for subjective morality. the thought experiment is as follows:
You pass a well, such as the one pictured, but this one has a winch attached to it. assume a man has fallen into the well, and is stuck at the bottom. the well is in a somewhat obscure place, and people rarely pass it by chance. but luckily for him, you've come along. imagine that you can easily crank the winch and lift the man up and he survives. all you must do, is crank the winch. saves the day.
the thought experiment, is basically that if you saved the man, no explanation is required. but imagine you don't, you pass the well by and ignore the soon to be victim at the bottom. he has a paper and pen, and writes your name and his story. the letter is found months later along with his remains.
the point is, people would DEMAND AN EXPLANATION. the man was innocent, he did nothing to you, he was not dangerous or a menace to society. society however, would absolutely require a REASON why you DIDN'T save the man, whereas if you DID, no explanation is required. this to me is very important, to me this means something.
thoughts?
