The Greater Good

[Ephemeral]

If you had to kill yourself to save two people, screw it.

If you had to kill yourself to save 100 people or the world, then that's good enough motivation to me (but I'd have to have some proof that they are in danger)

Dying for what you believe in is what makes it worth it, not the number of people involved. If I see two thugs beating up a old lady or other helpless person, then dying while I try to help means any day is a good day to die.

[T3l Ca7]

Good and bad are defined by men (or a great woman in my case :grin. It is hard to say what is worth what is not.

Yes, to sacrifice yourself to save 100 strangers might be a noble thing to do, but have you thought about you are hurting the people who love and care about you the most for the people you hardly even know of?

Saving an old woman from the beating by two thugs would be a heroic thing to do. But how do you know she didn't do something terrible to them like poison and kill their whole families?

Faith is something I do not have, and I do not have it for a reason.

[Rab]

Yes I believe that saving 2MillionPeople is better than saving 2People. But when it comes down to saving 2People or 1Person then it gets tricky. If I could save my girlfriend, or the entire population of London, I would save my girlfriend.

[Baszie]

Ew

I would never sacrifice myself for 2 people, 1.000.000 people is a bit trickier but I wouldn't have the guts to do it. However, I will feel miserable the rest of my life because I could have saved but didn't save 1 million people. it's hard.
Generally I will always fight for my own life (some exceptions).

My answer to the original question:
Saving 100 lifes by killing 1 person is wrong. Taking lifes is wrong. But there will always be people that keep making people die.

One last thing, spending your life (Not dieing but just abandoning your dreams) on a region with many problems is one of the greatest things to do.

[Ephemeral]

Good and bad are defined by men (or a great woman in my case :grin. It is hard to say what is worth what is not.

Yes, to sacrifice yourself to save 100 strangers might be a noble thing to do, but have you thought about you are hurting the people who love and care about you the most for the people you hardly even know of?

Saving an old woman from the beating by two thugs would be a heroic thing to do. But how do you know she didn't do something terrible to them like poison and kill their whole families?

Faith is something I do not have, and I do not have it for a reason.

I define good and bad in real-time and as the situation arises, it is not hard for me. I feel comfortable in making a decision on whether or not a victim is being preyed upon and is truly helpless. Of course I can not know if that victim has previously done ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in their lives. I do not think I need to make that judgment, it can be left to others. The judgment I CAN make is whether or not I am the kind of person who is willing to die for something I believe in.

As for the other point you made…
The people who know me, including the one I have been married to for 24+ years, know that I am this way. The partners in my company have known me for over a decade and understand who I am as a person. Given this, they can make contingency plans if they see fit. So I do not see this as an issue.

[Bioture]

This sounds like a "24" question.

The president was stupid to almost sacrifice his wife. But then again it was probably the right choice.

[Troll King]

I like how in this week's episode you could see the exact moment when Mike Novick lost his last remaining shread respect for the president.

[T3l Ca7]

I define good and bad in real-time and as the situation arises, it is not hard for me. I feel comfortable in making a decision on whether or not a victim is being preyed upon and is truly helpless. Of course I can not know if that victim has previously done ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in their lives. I do not think I need to make that judgment, it can be left to others. The judgment I CAN make is whether or not I am the kind of person who is willing to die for something I believe in.

As for the other point you made…
The people who know me, including the one I have been married to for 24+ years, know that I am this way. The partners in my company have known me for over a decade and understand who I am as a person. Given this, they can make contingency plans if they see fit. So I do not see this as an issue.

I think the best way to explain what I meant is to ask you:

If you had a choice to either rescue three people who you love and care the most and 1000 people who you did not even know existed, who would you rescue? (assume you could only rescue one party and the other party would die)

(if you don't see how my example illustrated my point I am willing to explain).

[Fluffz]

you obviously should think about saving the ones you love first, but the question was more like would you steal medicine(action) to save 100 random people(the greater good). and why? because yes or no doesnt say shit.

im not tired of stessing the concept of (western) moral levels again:

Destruction: You destroy out of curiosity, randomness. often seen at small kids.
Obedience: You do do what you are told to do
Egoism: You follow your - or the groups your belong to - own beliefs.
limited Egoism: see: an eye for an eye
Conformity You try to please others
Trading: you look at the value of things and base your decission on it
Law: you follow your cultures existing law you have been raised in
Right you question law. see: human rights
Ethic: you follow a law that protects everyone, everything, every group, culture and humankind just alike. see: ethic concepts
-Faith this would mean that everything you do because god wants it to be like that is right
Love: if this world and ethic was created by a loving god, everything you do with love has to be considered right.

The answer is yes just like its is no. your intentions are the key

[Stompa]

My question to you is- Do you believe that actions done for the greater good/ with the greater good in mind (no matter how bad) are acceptable if they mean a smaller number of people have to die?

As long as you PAY IT FORWARD

[a falling tree]

Depends. Greater good is just a point view or belief. So I wouldn't know.
And it would depend on the situation, both as some before me said already

[2112]

Hey shits. What's this about "good"?

[Dameon Angell]

Highlight below for my post. It's hidden, because if you haven't seen the last episode of 24.. I don't wanna ruin it for you.

Yes, Liquid, it was alright to let the Suberovs (sp?) die to protect the US Population from a Nerve gas strike. It was mainly just bad luck that CTU found out about it to prevent the attack, now the nerve gas comes in.

But, if that wasn't what you were refering to, then, in general, I'd go with Galelulelo and say that it is definately a decision to decision basis.

[Liquid Blue]

I don't watch 24.