Thursday, January 17, 2013
In Kai Nielsen's A Defense of Utilitarianism, he seems to be opposed to the idea of conservatism because it is unjustified. He states that conservatism is, "a normative theory which maintains that there is a privileged moral principle or cluster of moral principles, prescribing determinate actions, with which it would always be wrong not to act in accordance no matter what the consequences." With this said, I want to talk about The Case of the Innocent Fat Man. The basic story goes that the fat man got stuck at the mouth of the cave, trapping people inside. The problem occurs when the high tide comes, because it will essentially drown the fat man as well as everyone else in the cave. The moral dilemma, then, is whether to kill the fat man (with a stick of dynamite that someone has) or for everyone to die. I think this situation is very different from the other cases presented in Nielsen's reading because in this case, you have the possibility of being either the fat man or the people in the cave. You may have a particular opinion depending on which side of the situation you are in. If I were one of the people stuck in the cave, I don't think I'd want to die. However, if on the other hand, I were the fat man, I'm not sure if I'd be willing to sacrifice my own life for the sake of others, which would ultimately benefit the greatest amount of people. I guess what I'm saying is that I sympathize with the fat man, because I don't think he should have to sacrifice his life for the sake of others, but at the same time, I don't think everyone should have to die when there is a possibility for a majority of them to live.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with you about this situation. I posted elsewhere that I would want to find a sort of middle ground to this dilemma if it does exist, because I would neither want the fat man to die for the sake of the others or the others to die and the fat man live. I believe there are possibilities and situations that can exist as a "both-and" rather than a "either-or".
ReplyDeleteI think that if the majority of the class were in the position of a person stuck in the cave, they would not want to die. Where I think people would differ is when they are put in the position of the fat man. Some, as you have said, would not sacrifice themselves for the others in the cave. I personally would. While in the shoes of the fat man, I'm not sure if moral or ethical philosophy would play a role in their decision to sacrifice themselves. I think it is for this reason that the issue is so difficult.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what I'd do if I were trapped in the cave, but if I was the fat man I would be fine with them killing me to live. I'm not saying that I'd jump for joy at the idea, but if there was no other option, I would be okay with dying.
ReplyDeleteIf I did live and the rest of them did drown, then for however long I lived after that, I would feel guilty about having been partly responsible for their deaths, and that is something that I do not want on my conscience. Even though I did not seek to cause them harm, I was causing them harm, and given no other options, would have accepted my death. I look at it more from a perspective of they're defending their lives in the only way possible, rather than a many v. few situation.
If I were in the cave, I feel as though I'd rather die than kill someone who is not trying to harm me. I don't think that I would advocate or participate in the use of the dynamite, but I probably wouldn't try to stop it either.
I agree with your interpretation of the story and this is one of the main problems that I have with Utilitarianism as a locus of moral action. I think that in cases like the one involving the fat man, if you are to adhere fully to the Utilitarian ideals, then you must sacrifice your personal moral beliefs in order to achieve the maximum amount of good for the maximum amount of people. I find this idea to be very problematic because it seems as though it is calling us to abolish, or at least diminish, our personal moral integrity.
ReplyDeleteIf I were trapped in the cave, and if I were the fat man, I would choose to have myself blown up. I would come to this conclusion because no one should have to suffer or even have their life taken due to my actions or lack there of. Less blame lies within the other people in the cave because their existence or their presence in the cave is not directly putting the lives of others in jeopardy. Now although we aren't given enough information about how fat the fat man actually was and how small the crack was that he couldn't fit through, I believe that the fat man does carry some responsibility in putting the people's lives in danger. Although we as humans have defining traits and characteristics that are innate or acquired, we are nonetheless held responsible for these traits, i.e. being overweight or "fat." Now I know that my next comment is going to be provocative and insensitive, but the fat man should not have tried to fit between the crack and he should not have gone down in the cave.
ReplyDeleteMorality has to do with the wellbeing of our neighbors, correct ? therefore The question at hand here is it it just to kill the fat man to save the others, by definition "Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility." or in other words the greater good for the greater numbers. In order to save the others i believe that it is just to kill the fat man in order to save the others. What would make this more moral is of the fat man agreed to kill himself because then we would include the moral theory of autonomy and the man being able to die at his own free will. Also if they are going to drown and die anyways then there is no difference because you are not changing faith you are just deciding when it happens.
ReplyDelete_Branden Bidon
Morality has to do with the wellbeing of our neighbors, correct ? therefore The question at hand here is it it just to kill the fat man to save the others, by definition "Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility." or in other words the greater good for the greater numbers. In order to save the others i believe that it is just to kill the fat man in order to save the others. What would make this more moral is of the fat man agreed to kill himself because then we would include the moral theory of autonomy and the man being able to die at his own free will. Also if they are going to drown and die anyways then there is no difference because you are not changing faith you are just deciding when it happens.
ReplyDelete_Branden Bidon