Funny thought

**Habelo** · February 28, 2006, 05:40 AM

Funny thought all:
If someone is all alone in the world, a man who dont know anyone, noone knows him. Then a man kills him. Now noone has gotten even a tiny bit hurt, noone misses this man, noone will ever know about this. Not the media, he had no family and so on..

When i hear this, i can only come to the conclusion that its aint wrong to kill him right? If noone will ever EVER get hurt by this(not even know of this, causing no fear either) why would it be wrong? The one that's dead certainly not unhappy about it...
And lets exclude the murderor in this, hes not the important in this..

**Kino** · February 28, 2006, 05:53 AM

Deleted by user.

**Slimshoom** · February 28, 2006, 06:34 AM

The reason that normal people dont murder other people without other circumstances is not because they think that other people will be affected by it. It is because of how the person who is getting murdered feels. Even though no one know about him/her, it doesnt mean that this person has no meaning or purpose or will to live. They dont want to die even though no one knows who they are.

**Habelo** · February 28, 2006, 08:37 AM

First: i said to exclude the murder didnt i?
Second: I said noone will know, that means spreading no fear at all, noone will get hurt by it. And when it comes to the dead being unhappy, unhappy people dont really greif ore feel sad ore want anything. So the dead dont aint happy and aint sad, its nothing he dont want anything and have no regret.
third: only thing i can think of that would make this unjustified would be.,... I cant really come up with anything, scaaary!

Though if the media ore anyone else found out about the murder, fear would spread, and with fear is simiular to pain wich making it a wrong thing to do. But if they didnt....

**Leviathan** · February 28, 2006, 12:19 PM

I see something wrong with it: How do you know that the hermit man was going to remain his entire life with no contact. There is a chance that he could meet someone else, fall in love, have kids, or become a community leaderm, etc. Or, like many of the world's great philosophers decide to live in isolation while he writes things that will be immensly important in 100 yrs, 200yrs, 2000yrs.

The point is you don't know. And because you don't you have no right (much less no reason) to kill him. Plus, that is the way he has chosen to live out his life, as a hermit. That might not be a popular choice, yet it still is just as valid as anything else.

**Ahlerich** · March 02, 2006, 03:35 PM

holy **** i must be priviledged that i have a feeling that killing somebody even if he is not missed and nobody notices is wrong.
i thought about this coz i thought htere must be a philosophical point in this but its not. the only thing is nobody will notice the murder so nobody will care. but that does not mean it doesnt matter. it still is wrong to kill somebody. lol crazy to even say that. why dont you kill ppl? to not **** the media off? no to not make a family sad? no. you dont do it because you dont have a right to decide over somebodies life and death for fuks sake.
and yes i think its weird to that you have no natural feeling that that would be wrong.

**mischief** · March 02, 2006, 04:26 PM

um... you stipulate that we have to exclude the murder victim?

isn't that just a little absurd? because we can't exclude the victim... it renders the entire question ridiculous

**Mathias** · March 02, 2006, 04:35 PM

The person is innocent and thus does not deserve to die, but if there is no afterlife the guy who gets killed will not miss live. If there is a afterlife then the person will go to heaven\paradise since he was innocent and will not miss life. No one will miss him.
So my conclusion is that the act is evil, but nothing evil will come from it

**Turbo** · March 02, 2006, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by Habelo

Funny thought all:
If someone is all alone in the world, a man who dont know anyone, noone knows him. Then a man kills him. Now noone has gotten even a tiny bit hurt, noone misses this man, noone will ever know about this. Not the media, he had no family and so on..

When i hear this, i can only come to the conclusion that its aint wrong to kill him right? If noone will ever EVER get hurt by this(not even know of this, causing no fear either) why would it be wrong? The one that's dead certainly not unhappy about it...
And lets exclude the murderor in this, hes not the important in this..

It isn't wrong to kill him if you are devoid of morals and ethics and are little more than an animal yourself.

**Last Roman** · March 02, 2006, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by Habelo

Funny thought all:
If someone is all alone in the world, a man who dont know anyone, noone knows him. Then a man kills him. Now noone has gotten even a tiny bit hurt, noone misses this man, noone will ever know about this. Not the media, he had no family and so on..

When i hear this, i can only come to the conclusion that its aint wrong to kill him right? If noone will ever EVER get hurt by this(not even know of this, causing no fear either) why would it be wrong? The one that's dead certainly not unhappy about it...
And lets exclude the murderor in this, hes not the important in this..

its still ethically wrong. It doesn't matter who it is, murder is almost universally considered wrong, whether the victim is a homeless guy or a celebrity. Of course the celebrity will get the press coverage, but does that make it any worse? no, murder is murder

**MasterAdnin** · March 02, 2006, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by Habelo

Funny thought all:
If someone is all alone in the world, a man who dont know anyone, noone knows him. Then a man kills him. Now noone has gotten even a tiny bit hurt, noone misses this man, noone will ever know about this. Not the media, he had no family and so on..

When i hear this, i can only come to the conclusion that its aint wrong to kill him right? If noone will ever EVER get hurt by this(not even know of this, causing no fear either) why would it be wrong? The one that's dead certainly not unhappy about it...
And lets exclude the murderor in this, hes not the important in this..

It is still wrong, for you have taken a life. Usually, no one wants to die, and if they do it is due to a disease or illness. No matter what, it is not right what-so-ever to kill a person.

Adnan

**Irishman** · March 02, 2006, 05:12 PM

We have an inaliable right to live, no matter who cares about us.

**Kanaric** · March 02, 2006, 10:40 PM

I think this guy takes homeless people off the streets then hunts them for sport in south dakota.

**~~Atheist Peace~~** · March 02, 2006, 10:44 PM

Originally Posted by Habelo

Funny thought all:
If someone is all alone in the world, a man who dont know anyone, noone knows him. Then a man kills him. Now noone has gotten even a tiny bit hurt, noone misses this man, noone will ever know about this. Not the media, he had no family and so on..

When i hear this, i can only come to the conclusion that its aint wrong to kill him right? If noone will ever EVER get hurt by this(not even know of this, causing no fear either) why would it be wrong? The one that's dead certainly not unhappy about it...
And lets exclude the murderor in this, hes not the important in this..

It's wrong if you consider it morally wrong to kill someone. It's not wrong if you don't. It's that simple.

**GambleFish** · March 02, 2006, 11:29 PM

The hurt is to the man who killed them.

An axe can cut a helpless tree, which does nothing in response, but the axe is dulled in chopping and rusted by the sap. The axe does violence on the helpless tree and is itself harmed by it.

Plus there is one more murderer in the world spreading hate and death.

**~~Atheist Peace~~** · March 02, 2006, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by Al'Thor

The hurt is to the man who killed them.

An axe can cut a helpless tree, which does nothing in response, but the axe is dulled in chopping and rusted by the sap. The axe does violence on the helpless tree and is itself harmed by it.

Plus there is one more murderer in the world spreading hate and death.

Ugh... Morals are not inherent or absolute, understand this already. Morals are 100% relative (and really, frivolous IMO) and murder is not absolutely wrong. Jeez

**GambleFish** · March 02, 2006, 11:56 PM

Originally Posted by Atheist Peace

Ugh... Morals are not inherent or absolute, understand this already. Morals are 100% relative (and really, frivolous IMO) and murder is not absolutely wrong. Jeez

I am just saying that whatever the morals and beliefs, there is inherent wrong in the act of taking a life, and that one who does so is hurt by it. If his morals are frivolous and not important than the act will have all the more effect.

the tree thing was from a friend who likes to spout stuff like that.... lol

**~~Atheist Peace~~** · March 03, 2006, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by Al'Thor

I am just saying that whatever the morals and beliefs, there is inherent wrong in the act of taking a life, and that one who does so is hurt by it. If his morals are frivolous and not important than the act will have all the more effect.

the tree thing was from a friend who likes to spout stuff like that.... lol

No, you just don't seem to understand. There is not inherent wrong in taking a life.

**Lee1026** · March 02, 2006, 11:34 PM

It is economically wrong to kill a person,However.

**~~Ummon~~** · March 02, 2006, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by Habelo

Funny thought all:
If someone is all alone in the world, a man who dont know anyone, noone knows him. Then a man kills him. Now noone has gotten even a tiny bit hurt, noone misses this man, noone will ever know about this. Not the media, he had no family and so on..

When i hear this, i can only come to the conclusion that its aint wrong to kill him right? If noone will ever EVER get hurt by this(not even know of this, causing no fear either) why would it be wrong? The one that's dead certainly not unhappy about it...
And lets exclude the murderor in this, hes not the important in this..

Law is in place to protect even those whom nobody knows. Since the corpse will be unavoidably found, the killer has to be prosecuted.

Even if there is no damage to others, there was damage for the dead.

Thread: Funny thought

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Hybrid View

Funny thought

Posting Permissions