Would you kill children to become smarter?

[The Sotoan Union]

Would you kill small children to become the small children you've killed?

[Kelinfort]

Sure I'd do it...starting with your kids
#sarcasm

[Constaniana]

...what kind of hypothetical is that?

Would you abort a pregnant tomato on the Ides of March if Morgan Freeman narrated it using a purple rabbit as a microphone?

Only on Tuesday when the pears are aligned.

[Darwinish Brentsylvania]

What, NO

[Timothia]

There is no one I know that I would trust with that much knowledge, and I certainly wouldn't trust myself with it. If you honestly believe that you would remain uncorrupted, then have at it. After killing a child, the knowledge has already corrupted you. You have already changed, so who's to say you wouldn't change even more? What is stopping you? You have already crossed the line of moral decency by KILLING A CHILD, do we really want you and your knowledge to be in charge any more?

No. I understand the idea that you would be able to make scientific advances that could save lives, but science at the cost of morals will not end will. If you abandon basic human morals (don't kill little kids) for "scientific advances", then you are a compromised human being. If your morals are compromised, you no longer have an inner compass that will ensure that you don't go beserk and use your knowledge to murder all of us.



It would indeed be a gamble. How are we ensured that

Basic human morals-or at least your version of them-are, to be honest, stupid. What matters is not "oh, he killed a kid, he's evil". What matters is "he killed a kid, but he saved billions of other lives, so I think it was worth the cost". If killing a kid will prevent ten other kids from dying, then by not killing that kid you are killing ten. Killing ten kids is worse than killing one. Don't you agree?

But what if you kill one kid and then never act on your new knowledge? Would you kill two kids to save four kids? Would you kill 100 million kids to save 100,000,001 kids? After all, by killing a million, you saved one! Where would it no longer become ok? Where would you draw the line? Most importantly, how do we know that you (with infinite knowledge) actually WOULD draw the line eventually?

EDIT - Also, as someone else said earlier, how do you know that this kid won't SAVE hundreds of thousands of people later on in life? And what if all those people die because you thought you knew best?

[United Marxist Nations]

Depends. How many children, how old, and how much smarter? I mean, yeah, I would totally kill, say, a single newborn infant (who doesn't currently have a mind) if I would then be smart enough cure all diseases, poverty, and global warming. If I had to kill millions of older children and it would raise my IQ by one point? Hell no.

The scenario given is of one who values knowledge for knowledge's sake, not as something used to help others. Their concern is of getting caught, not the ethics behind lives saved for lives ended. It is implied that you are doing this just to become smarter, not receive near-omnipotence.

If it was to receive omnipotence, I think we would all do it.

[Vamtrl]

Shaggai - Sarcasm.

Would you kill small children to become the small children you've killed?

You need to go to a long term care facility and ask the residents that question, preferably in survey form.

[Vamtrl]

The scenario given is of one who values knowledge for knowledge's sake, not as something used to help others. Their concern is of getting caught, not the ethics behind lives saved for lives ended. It is implied that you are doing this just to become smarter, not receive near-omnipotence.

If it was to receive omnipotence, I think we would all do it.

Just bring the kid back if you are becoming omnipotent.

[Arkolon]

exams in a week-- who knows how much I'll need the extra smartitiness :3

[Yugo-Austria]

Yes yes yes!
Thousands thousands!
My lust for knowledge KNOWS NO BOUNDS!
INSATIABLE!!!!!

[Marcurix]

No, I'm good thanks.

[Pyre Raiders2]

There is no one I know that I would trust with that much knowledge, and I certainly wouldn't trust myself with it. If you honestly believe that you would remain uncorrupted, then have at it. After killing a child, the knowledge has already corrupted you. You have already changed, so who's to say you wouldn't change even more? What is stopping you? You have already crossed the line of moral decency by KILLING A CHILD, do we really want you and your knowledge to be in charge any more?

No. I understand the idea that you would be able to make scientific advances that could save lives, but science at the cost of morals will not end will. If you abandon basic human morals (don't kill little kids) for "scientific advances", then you are a compromised human being. If your morals are compromised, you no longer have an inner compass that will ensure that you don't go beserk and use your knowledge to murder all of us.



It would indeed be a gamble. How are we ensured that

I actually agree with you here. Except, it really depends on the corruption you are susceptible to. Everyone is corruptible. But, there are several forms of corruption. If it came to money, I've been raised in a way that I find money an odd concept and hold no love for it. But, I am not saying I am completely incorruptible; I know there is something out there that could corrupt me. Added to this I lack a "good" moral compass, to begin with. While I have a somewhat higher level of empathy than most people, I tend to not always follow this. I follow what I believe to be right. And this "right" that I believe in, is not always shared. There are times i question my moral decency. I question if I am a "good" person.

Am I confident that I would refrain from using the gained knowledge to kill others? No, I'm not. No one could be. And, if someone says otherwise, they most likely hold themselves high as someone of immense character, ethics, and purity. But, people who think themselves this before being tested usually don't preform well once there. In truth, if I were to be faced with the situation this thread asks of us, I would be terrified. I would still kill the child in the hopes I would maintain my sanity and personality I have now. Because, then, i would be sure that I would use the knowledge for the benefit of everyone else. Or, at least, to the best of my abilities. I tend to be a little naive and trusting of others. But, with that knowledge entailed by killing the child, this likely wouldn't be an issue.

But, when it comes down to the matter, no one can be sure how they'd react until they face the situation in reality. I am no exception.

[United Marxist Nations]

If it was to receive omnipotence, I think we would all do it.

Just bring the kid back if you are becoming omnipotent.

Exactly, if you gain omnipotence, it's a win-win.

[Tekania]

Let me think about this for a second or two.... nope didn't need that long.... nope, no way... hellz naw.

[The balkens]

and NSG has officially gone off the deep end! no amount of drugs, alcohol and therapy is going to fix this cluster fuck!

[Pyre Raiders2]

I think it's less that you're willing to kill, and more the fact it seems you'd have little to no remorse. I, as said before, would kill a child for the knowledge of how to prevent the suffering and deaths of more people. But, I would do so with a muddied and hurt conscious due to the fact I had been only been able to save others from the death of someone.
It's not only that you seem to be lacking a conscious. But, also, that, from the way you worded it, it sounds as if you would only want the knowledge for the sake of having it. It didn't appear as if you'd use the knowledge in a constructive way for others.

The advantages of psychopathy, m'boy.

But, of course I'd use my newfound intellect constructively. I woulda figured that went without saying, really.

I didn't realize you were actually psychotic. I thought it was only Karath.

Well, not everyone knows everyone else's intentions. Most things have to be explicitly said or people will create their own interpretation.

[The Star Corporation]

Yes, I would. If I were able to use that knowledge for the betterment of society and the human population as a whole, I would do so with little hesitation. I would be willing to carry the burden of also knowing that I am a monster who killed an innocent child. But, I would repent in a way that makes it so no other suffers, ever again. It would benefit humanity and the populations of all other animalistic, insectoid, and such life on the earth. If I were in that child's place, and someone could murder me to do the above, I would want them to murder me. I am but one life compared to the possible benefit of billions now, and billions to come.

Now imagine that child crying, screaming, and kicking, possibly pleading with you to stop, and you holding a knife to that child's throat about to murder it, and tell me again how you would kill it with 'little hesitation'. I mean seriously, you would not be able to go through with it, and you know it. Even to benefit humanity. And if you did, the guilt would more than likely be too much to bear. Unless you were some heartless beast of course. Which I suspect the majority of the people here aren't/

A child is not an "it". They are people, they are "thems". And darling, there are more heartless "beasts" on this forum than you know. I feel [i]nothing[/'i] when I hear about a death, a thirteen year old girl being raped for hours, the death of a close relative or a closer friend... These so called "beasts" have reverted to their feral nature.

Preservation of either yourself or those you feel responsible for... Sadly, it's always the former.

[Timothia]

There is no one I know that I would trust with that much knowledge, and I certainly wouldn't trust myself with it. If you honestly believe that you would remain uncorrupted, then have at it. After killing a child, the knowledge has already corrupted you. You have already changed, so who's to say you wouldn't change even more? What is stopping you? You have already crossed the line of moral decency by KILLING A CHILD, do we really want you and your knowledge to be in charge any more?

No. I understand the idea that you would be able to make scientific advances that could save lives, but science at the cost of morals will not end will. If you abandon basic human morals (don't kill little kids) for "scientific advances", then you are a compromised human being. If your morals are compromised, you no longer have an inner compass that will ensure that you don't go beserk and use your knowledge to murder all of us.



It would indeed be a gamble. How are we ensured that

I actually agree with you here. Except, it really depends on the corruption you are susceptible to. Everyone is corruptible. But, there are several forms of corruption. If it came to money, I've been raised in a way that I find money an odd concept and hold no love for it. But, I am not saying I am completely incorruptible; I know there is something out there that could corrupt me. Added to this I lack a "good" moral compass, to begin with. While I have a somewhat higher level of empathy than most people, I tend to not always follow this. I follow what I believe to be right. And this "right" that I believe in, is not always shared. There are times i question my moral decency. I question if I am a "good" person.

Am I confident that I would refrain from using the gained knowledge to kill others? No, I'm not. No one could be. And, if someone says otherwise, they most likely hold themselves high as someone of immense character, ethics, and purity. But, people who think themselves this before being tested usually don't preform well once there. In truth, if I were to be faced with the situation this thread asks of us, I would be terrified. I would still kill the child in the hopes I would maintain my sanity and personality I have now. Because, then, i would be sure that I would use the knowledge for the benefit of everyone else. Or, at least, to the best of my abilities. I tend to be a little naive and trusting of others. But, with that knowledge entailed by killing the child, this likely wouldn't be an issue.

But, when it comes down to the matter, no one can be sure how they'd react until they face the situation in reality. I am no exception.

Fair enough. I wouldn't trust myself, and I wouldn't want to take a chance like that, especially when a child dies either way.

[God Kefka]

Sure...

I expect with that kind of intelligence (''in every way and in every aspect... mentally superior to every peer) I would be unstoppable.

I think the good I would accomplish for myself, my friends, my country, my family would far far far outweigh the life just ONE kid (see no. 4, it's just one kid).

Besides, what happens when we die? No one knows. Maybe I've just sent the kid to a better place, in all likelihood he simply ceased to exist (something that happens to all of us inevitably right?). It's not really that evil and unforgivable in the grand scheme of history...

I haven't really changed the pattern of history DIRECTLY in any way except by massively augmenting my own intelligence. The kid's life process was speeded up that's all...

And I wouldn't get caught... so what's the problem?

You kinda have directly changed history by removing someone who could grow up to be great. What if someone murdered George Washington or Horatio Nelson when they were children?

And another thing: saying "it's just one kid; it's alright!" is a pretty disgusting position. Where do you draw the line? Is killing two children acceptable as well? A dozen? A hundred? Ten million? Hell, your hands are already soaked with blood, why not go ahead and kill all their parents, siblings and extended family out to their sixth cousins and the woman who served the kid's dad when he went to a diner with his buddy from high school? She's old and doing nothing more useful than a meaningless job in a diner! There's no way she has any worth!

I don't know where the line is.

However, the life of one kid for producing one individual in this world who is in '''in every way and in every aspect... mentally superior to every peer'' is a sound and worthwhile trade.

I don't care if I kill George Washington or Horatio... no one I kill is going to ''in every way and in every aspect...'' be ''mentally superior to ever peer.'' You're being a moral absolutist and not seeing the big picture here.

The benefit of keeping 1 child alive in society is less then the benefit of getting 1 new individual with mental capabilities that are at the top of human achievement in EVER plausible category of human endeavor.

You have to think about what is best for society as a whole and not just what is best for 1 single child...

[Vamtrl]

You kinda have directly changed history by removing someone who could grow up to be great. What if someone murdered George Washington or Horatio Nelson when they were children?

And another thing: saying "it's just one kid; it's alright!" is a pretty disgusting position. Where do you draw the line? Is killing two children acceptable as well? A dozen? A hundred? Ten million? Hell, your hands are already soaked with blood, why not go ahead and kill all their parents, siblings and extended family out to their sixth cousins and the woman who served the kid's dad when he went to a diner with his buddy from high school? She's old and doing nothing more useful than a meaningless job in a diner! There's no way she has any worth!

I don't know where the line is.

However, the life of one kid for producing one individual in this world who is in '''in every way and in every aspect... mentally superior to every peer'' is a sound and worthwhile trade.

I don't care if I kill George Washington or Horatio... no one I kill is going to ''in ever way and in ever aspect...'' be ''mentally superior to ever peer.'' You're being a moral absolutist and not seeing the big picture here.

The benefit of keeping 1 child alive in society is less then the benefit of getting 1 new individual with mental capabilities that are at the top of human achievement in EVER plausible category of human endeavor.

You have to think about what is best for society as a whole and not just what is best for 1 single child...

Just do it on a brain dead child that is about to get their plugs pulled out. Moral crises averted.

[Yugo-Austria]

You kinda have directly changed history by removing someone who could grow up to be great. What if someone murdered George Washington or Horatio Nelson when they were children?

And another thing: saying "it's just one kid; it's alright!" is a pretty disgusting position. Where do you draw the line? Is killing two children acceptable as well? A dozen? A hundred? Ten million? Hell, your hands are already soaked with blood, why not go ahead and kill all their parents, siblings and extended family out to their sixth cousins and the woman who served the kid's dad when he went to a diner with his buddy from high school? She's old and doing nothing more useful than a meaningless job in a diner! There's no way she has any worth!

I don't know where the line is.

However, the life of one kid for producing one individual in this world who is in '''in every way and in every aspect... mentally superior to every peer'' is a sound and worthwhile trade.

I don't care if I kill George Washington or Horatio... no one I kill is going to ''in every way and in every aspect...'' be ''mentally superior to ever peer.'' You're being a moral absolutist and not seeing the big picture here.

The benefit of keeping 1 child alive in society is less then the benefit of getting 1 new individual with mental capabilities that are at the top of human achievement in EVER plausible category of human endeavor.

You have to think about what is best for society as a whole and not just what is best for 1 single child...

I fully agree with you Kef, he is being too morale.
Disgusts me.

[Riiser-Larsen]

If they are the child versions of major dictators then probably. Otherwise, fuck no.

[Augarundus]

holy shit this is the greatest thread ever

[Yugo-Austria]

holy shit this is the greatest thread ever

Hahahaha!
Yes, this is quite the most interesting forum I've been for the who knows how many years I've been in this forumhole.

[Boston and Surrounding Provinces]

I swear, this website is on drugs...