4 ms·

I don't know why you are getting downvoted, it's a perfectly valid point. There are cases where there'd be a choice between acting ethically towards one person

I don't know why you are getting downvoted, it's a perfectly valid point. There are cases where there'd be a choice between acting ethically towards one person or saving a live of another. The dissonance is further amplified when there's more than one life at stake. GP, just pretend your kid was kidnapped and be dead in 24 hours if you don't find him. Now, say, you have an unrestricted access to the kidnapper who knows where your child is.

gus_massa 13y ago
The problem is false confessions. People have even confessed to be a witch and get burned, to stop torture. Just pretend your kid was kidnapped and be dead in 24 hours if you don't find him. Now, say, you have an unrestricted access to someone that is accused of being the kidnapper. (By the way, he was accused by the former boyfriend of his daughter, because he didn’t like the relationship.) Now, you are lucky , and you get unrestricted access to a new suspect. (By the way, he is a moron the police incriminate because they must show some result to the press before the 11 news report.)
tripzilch 13y ago
> GP, just pretend your kid was kidnapped and be dead in 24 hours if you don't find him. Now, say, you have an unrestricted access to the kidnapper who knows where your child is. This is why we disapprove of vigilante justice. Because it can make any course of action seem like a good idea, given that you are sufficiently emotionally involved.