UnderGround Forums
 

PhilosophyGround >> If you knew someone was evil....


3/30/05 3:58 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MONSTAR
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 30-Mar-05
Member Since: 12/16/2000
Posts: 1712
 
and want's to be in Hell, or going to Hell, is it ok to kill him/her.
3/30/05 11:50 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
126 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 30-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 4490
Ok in what sense? You may be violating some agreed on Right to life. You may also be doing something "morally wrong" if you're into that sort of thing. I'm not. -doug-
3/30/05 3:59 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
126 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 30-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 4494
It was for anyone who chose to answer, but was primarily directed at Monstar. He said "is it ok?" to which i ask "ok for what?" Is he asking if it's morally ok? Is he asking if it is legally ok? Is he asking if it's socially ok? There are some ways in which it might be acceptable, and some ways it wouldnt. And i'm not sure you've got Kant down right. I'm almost positive that he was a BIIIIIG advocate of the death penalty. -doug-
3/30/05 8:30 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
martial_shadow
1 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 30-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 4939
the question itself requires one to believe in evil and hell. I'm not sure about the former and I don't believe in the latter, so the question is kinda moot. If someone did believe in Hell and wanted to go, the quickest way would be suicide so he can take his own life.
3/31/05 11:56 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
vermonter
126 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 31-Mar-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 4502
Well, basically, it was important for Kant to show that people had free will/morals despite the evidence against them because he thought that without morality people wouldnt be getting what they deserved (eg. punishment). Derk Pereboom is an expert on Kant, and i'm almost positive that he said something like this. Find his email on the Philo page of uvm.edu and ask him yourself. -doug-
4/1/05 3:11 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
MONSTAR
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 01-Apr-05
Member Since: 12/16/2000
Posts: 1724
I guess I'm asking would it be right in a moral sense. Would it be justified. Would it be ok with the general consensus of relegious doctrine and or natural law.
4/2/05 11:12 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Dogbert
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02-Apr-05
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 14758
Accepting the underlying metaphysics for the sake of argument, if he really wants to be there he could have killed himself. So there is nothing to do for you.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.