FAQ |
Members List |
Calendar |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
General Chat General discussion. Want to chat about anything not covered in another forum - This is the place! |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
24-10-2019, 01:31 PM | #1 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
Well?
Jane, hating her husband and wanting him dead, puts poison in his coffee, thereby killing him. Debbie also hates her husband and would like him dead. One day, Debbie's husband accidentally puts poison in his coffee, thinking it's cream. Debbie has the antidote, but she does not give it to him. Knowing that she is the only one who can save him, she lets him die. Is Debbie's failure to act as bad as Jane's action?
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 01:38 PM | #2 | ||
|
|||
-
|
|
||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 01:40 PM | #3 | |||
|
||||
Quand il pleut, il pleut
|
...yeah, it’s equally as bad if she knew that it would save him but deliberately didn’t give it...bad Debbie...
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 01:42 PM | #4 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
hhhmmm I'm going to say Jane is worse here
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 01:52 PM | #5 | ||
|
|||
User banned
|
Quote:
Why do they have pioson |
||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 01:53 PM | #6 | ||
|
|||
Senior Member
|
I think they are equally guilty, they both did something to cause a death, one putting the poison in the coffee, the other not giving the antidote.
__________________
|
||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 01:54 PM | #7 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
They had a problem with rats driving through their kitchens
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 01:56 PM | #8 | |||
|
||||
A great thief
|
valar morghulis
__________________
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 02:01 PM | #9 | |||
|
||||
Quand il pleut, il pleut
|
...yeah both actions caused the same outcome of a death was my thought process as well for them to be equally as bad...Jane and Debbie are not good people...
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 02:06 PM | #10 | |||
|
||||
Senior Member
|
Have these murdering beggars never heard of divorce
|
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 02:43 PM | #11 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
So seeing as most of you think that both are equally as bad, what if you had to pass their sentences but the judge said one of them gets 25 years and one gets 10 years. Which sentence do you give to who?
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 02:49 PM | #12 | ||
|
|||
-
|
In response to your question in the other thread; action is worse than inaction. So Jane gets the 25 years for actively causing the death while Debbie gets 10 for doing nothing. In terms of safety, it's FAR more likely that someone who has already actively killed someone, deliberately, will kill again. They are both equally GUILTY in the deaths, but Jane is more DANGEROUS than Debbie.
|
||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 02:53 PM | #13 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
Quote:
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:07 PM | #14 | ||
|
|||
-
|
Morally I still say they're both the same. Debbie is still just as willing to cause a loss of life - she just doesn't have the stones to actually go through with it... Which makes Jane more of a risk to others in most normal settings.
|
||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:09 PM | #15 | ||
|
|||
-
|
Or in other words, Debbie's reason for being "less of a killer" isn't a difference in WANT, just in actual ability. Then you have to go into the question of whether morality is rooted in desire or in action. I'd argue mostly the former.
|
||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:10 PM | #16 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
This one reminds me of a scene in the Handmaids tail actually (only read if you're up to date)
Spoiler:
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:12 PM | #17 | ||
|
|||
-
|
There is a thought experiment already along those lines, similar to this one...
Julie wants to kill her friend. She makes them tea, and spoons what she believes to be rat poison into her friends cup. However, it's actually sugar, and nothing happens to the friend. Sue has no intention of harming anyone. She makes herself and her friend tea, and accidentally spoons rat poison into her friends cup from a bowl, believing it to be sugar. Her friend dies. Which of the two is more deserving of punishment? |
||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:13 PM | #18 | ||
|
|||
-
|
|
||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:13 PM | #19 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
hhhhmmm not sure I agree with that either tbh, a desire is inconsequential unless it's acted on
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:14 PM | #20 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
Yeah, the reasoning behind it I suppose yeah it's more similar to that one
__________________
Spoiler: Last edited by Niamh.; 24-10-2019 at 03:14 PM. |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:20 PM | #21 | |||
|
||||
This Witch doesn't burn
|
Debbie, because she didn't hate him enough to poison him but didn't save him
__________________
'put a bit of lippy on and run a brush through your hair, we are alcoholics, not savages' |
|||
Reply With Quote |
24-10-2019, 03:26 PM | #22 | |||
|
||||
I Love my brick
|
Quote:
Sue's was purely accidental. She didn't know someone had put rat poison in the sugar bowl so how could she be punished? It's must surely be the person who put the rat poison into the sugar bowl who was responsible?
__________________
Spoiler: |
|||
Reply With Quote |
Reply |
|
|