3 ms·
Just to be clear, subjecting someone of lesser brilliance (99.9999999% of the population) to Turing's treatment would be equally immoral. Seriously destabilizin
by tsally 16y ago
Just to be clear, subjecting someone of lesser brilliance (99.9999999% of the population) to Turing's treatment would be equally immoral. Seriously destabilizing a suicidal person is murder and on a moral level I don't believe in claiming that a particular murder is more or less immoral than another. Murder is murder and I don't think you can compare magnitudes. So if he had been an ordinary guy, his murder would still have been wrong on a moral level. I'm simply arguing that in addition to the usual costs of murder (felt in large part by the deceased family), society has borne an additional cost.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- doki_pen 16y agoDoesn't murder require intent? Are you saying that the government planned on destabili+ng him in order to make him commit suicide? Am I just thinking of murder 1?
- tsally 16y agoI was using murder in a colloquial sense, not a legal one. I'm pretty sure in England the legal term for what was done to Turing is constructive manslaughter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter_in_English_law#Unlawful_act_manslaughter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter_in_English_law#Unl...). But IANAL.
- pbhjpbhj 16y ago>I'm pretty sure in England the legal term for what was done to Turing is constructive manslaughter. The legal term would be something like "proper application of criminal law". You can't claim that it was constructive manslaughter to apply the law at the time.