Could you do this for the price of world peace?
- Thread starter game-lover
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Unless you?re an extreme sociopath, no-one would honestly torture a baby for world peace, which cannot ever exist due to our human nature anyway. But even if I did, it would scar both the baby (physically, at least) and me for life, and I?d be afraid of getting caught.
I can never suspend my disbelief enough to buy into that kind of scenario.
How does one achieve world peace by torturing a baby? Show me the cause and effect (doesn't have to be perfect, just make it plausible).
Also, how is world peace possible when rivalry is encoded in our DNA? We compete for everything (the fact that you're alive means that you've beaten the other sperm cells). You would have to change our genetic code to provide a lasting world peace (but we wouldn't be humans anymore then).
That or have enough power to threaten everyone into peace (but that wouldn't really be peace).
How does one achieve world peace by torturing a baby? Show me the cause and effect (doesn't have to be perfect, just make it plausible).
Also, how is world peace possible when rivalry is encoded in our DNA? We compete for everything (the fact that you're alive means that you've beaten the other sperm cells). You would have to change our genetic code to provide a lasting world peace (but we wouldn't be humans anymore then).
That or have enough power to threaten everyone into peace (but that wouldn't really be peace).
What does a baby got to do with world peace like I don't know that baby will grow up to be the next Hilter and by torturing it, the effect will have some kind of a lasting effect that prevent it from disrupting the possible world peace? (Yes I know that sound silly. I'm just trying to make sense to this silly scerino).
Anyway for my answer, I will only say yes if I am immediately apprehended for my cruel action (although it's another debate if I am willing to sacriface my freedom to be sent to prison) seeing how the scenerio is for me to become evil/ corrupt to bring world peace and hearing the baby scream will mentally scared me. Ok sure I probably won't get the metal treatment I want since it was intentional but I can still ask for repent during my time locked up in some hole somewhere.
Anyway for my answer, I will only say yes if I am immediately apprehended for my cruel action (although it's another debate if I am willing to sacriface my freedom to be sent to prison) seeing how the scenerio is for me to become evil/ corrupt to bring world peace and hearing the baby scream will mentally scared me. Ok sure I probably won't get the metal treatment I want since it was intentional but I can still ask for repent during my time locked up in some hole somewhere.
i think there will be quite a few downsides to having world peace. alot of technologies get discovered through war, the computer basically got invented through the cold war
This reminds me a lot of the end of Torchwood: Children of Earth
I think honestly the Torchwood version of the question works better. With the current question, it's too easy to just go "no, because world peace is impossible." With the Torchwood version, it's more a question of whether you would sacrifice someone you care about to keep a lot more people from going through something even worse, and you know it'll happen because the aliens who are forcing you to make the choice have backed up their threats in the past.
Captain Jack had to choose between a large percentage of all of the children on earth being taken away to be used as alien narcotics, which he had already been forced to do a few decades earlier, or to kill his own grandson in an excruciatingly painful manner in order to prevent it from ever happening again. He chose to kill his grandson.
I think honestly the Torchwood version of the question works better. With the current question, it's too easy to just go "no, because world peace is impossible." With the Torchwood version, it's more a question of whether you would sacrifice someone you care about to keep a lot more people from going through something even worse, and you know it'll happen because the aliens who are forcing you to make the choice have backed up their threats in the past.
You seem to have completely misunderstood. If you torture a baby for world peace you aren't getting off on abusing them... It's only one child, you'd potentially save millions more by doing this.hazabaza1 said:
A hypthetical doesn't have a legal obligation to be plausible...Kaleion said:
Considering some of the comments already on this thread as well as some inevitably coming up, you'd forgive me for thinking otherwise.bojackx said:
But still, no. I have a pretty damn negative view of torture on somebody who is mature and can defend themselves, never mind an infant.
This question is, essentially, do the ends justify the means? My answer is no, because the question doesn't even make sense: The ends can't justify the means, because the ends are determined by the means. If you want to live in a peaceful world, then you will not choose a method that leads to a different result; in this case, a world whose peace is founded on the torture of an infant as part of a pact with what can only be a supernatural and malign force robbing humanity of its free will as payment for your services.
- Nov 27, 2009
- 5,792
- 712
- 118
- Country
- The Dreamlands
- Gender
- Lose 1d20 sanity points.
I know, but I'm just saying that if hypothetically speaking, somebody told me that by torturing a child I would get world peace, I would not believe it, I really don't see myself or anyone else in any scenario, fantastic or otherwise in which the question would be applied, other than the deal with the devil thing, but that would obviously be a no, since he would obviously be tricking me.bojackx said:
I think what I mean is that my brain cannot compute the question without context, though that makes it my problem, but anyway my answer is no, because there isn't a single scenario in which I would believe said question to be serious.
EDIT: See 2 posts above, JimB is basically saying the same thing I'm saying.
Well played senior.OneCatch said:
OT: Ehhhhhhhh... Probably. I mean, I wouldn't enjoy it, and I would probably have to go to therapy for a long while, but I could see myself living with it via the rationalization that it was for the greater good, and could recover by using that.
In a heartbeat.
I would shoulder any possible guilty feelings because I know that the benefit to society would be well worth it. By me NOT doing it, I'd be ensuring the torturous deaths of millions more infants and children.
I'd even go far as to say that to NOT do it would be morally wrong (to a huge extent), but I'd rather not debate that part of it.
I would shoulder any possible guilty feelings because I know that the benefit to society would be well worth it. By me NOT doing it, I'd be ensuring the torturous deaths of millions more infants and children.
I'd even go far as to say that to NOT do it would be morally wrong (to a huge extent), but I'd rather not debate that part of it.
I could but I wouldn't. Conflict is interesting and without it I'd get fairly bored so it's not in my best interests to torture a baby for world peace.
What is defined by world peace here? Will torturing a baby end all war? If so, how? Will torturing a baby get rid of all disease?
You see, I would need to be ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that torturing the child would result in world peace. In my opinion, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. But what if the needs of the many are not met by this?
You see, I would need to be ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that torturing the child would result in world peace. In my opinion, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. But what if the needs of the many are not met by this?
The answer is easy: No.
The reason: World peace is worth nothing. It wouldn't hold for long. The whole problem is the nature of man. Any world peace would be highly unstable and would end because of the slightest glimps of attraction for the greed, power lust and/or egoism of those in power.
Is this worth one single act of cruelty?
Never.
On the other hand... I'd do it if in return mankind would get exterminated with a minimum of collateral damage. At least that would do good for the rest of life on our planet. Our species as a whole is rotten to the bone and far from being worthy of existence... While every individual can still be nice and decent.
The reason: World peace is worth nothing. It wouldn't hold for long. The whole problem is the nature of man. Any world peace would be highly unstable and would end because of the slightest glimps of attraction for the greed, power lust and/or egoism of those in power.
Is this worth one single act of cruelty?
Never.
On the other hand... I'd do it if in return mankind would get exterminated with a minimum of collateral damage. At least that would do good for the rest of life on our planet. Our species as a whole is rotten to the bone and far from being worthy of existence... While every individual can still be nice and decent.