Killing

[ICantSpellDawg]

If everyone is going to die one day, why is it wrong for humans to kill? Is it wrong for nature to kill people? If we are simply a part of nature, why are we held to a higher standard? If it is simply for reasons of a social contract that we do not kill, what if one chooses not to sign up (figuratively) because they believe that it is in their best interests to kill and gamble thier own lives? Please explain your position.

[Papewaio]

When you see how hard and long it is to raise a functional, healthy, happy, strong human being you kind of get the idea that the person should last as long as possible.

[Roark]

Is it wrong for nature to kill people? If we are simply a part of nature, why are we held to a higher standard?

I think most people aspire to be greater than beasts somehow. We revel in our conscious mind and its ability elevate us beyond instinct and survival mechanisms. I think that humans inherently recognise the value and goodness of love (agape), which is pretty much the opposite of killing.

[Soulforged]

If everyone is going to die one day, why is it wrong for humans to kill? Is it wrong for nature to kill people? If we are simply a part of nature, why are we held to a higher standard? If it is simply for reasons of a social contract that we do not kill, what if one chooses not to sign up (figuratively) because they believe that it is in their best interests to kill and gamble thier own lives? Please explain your position. Well because you fastforward the death. You must think that what the legislative system is trying to prevent is not the actual death, but the actions that tend to create the lifeless body. So if there's a body or not is irrelevant. I'll say that it's wrong to tend to kill someone, just for the sake of humanity. We as society cannot let the humanity degrade itself because of the liberating of all actions, it will be simple and plain chaos, and will be a great obstacle for evolution and peace. But yes looking at it from your perspective it's just because of social contract.

[Sjakihata]

Humans are not part of nature. Humans are more, above the nature. Sure, in a biological sense you can easily argue that Im wrong. But in a philosophical sense, I can argue that I am correct.

Classically, world is divided into three classes:

1. Humans
2. Fauna
3. Flora (here goes rocks, rivers etc)

So, in this perspective we are elevated from nature, because of our minds, simply put.
Why does it make it wrong to kill?
There are different answer to this question. Some say it's because we are breaking nomos (the law, or pact, translates to the norm of a community) others, in a religious sense, thinks its wrong to kill because God have so decreed (Thou shalt not kill).

At any rate, it is a common feature in most societies and cultures that ever existed - that killing is wrong. (exceptions are: for punishments, religious sacrifices and compassion killings). is it somekind of omni-present knowledge which inhabit every human through time and space? Or is it because our rational part of mind, deduces that if everyone go around killing, you'll eventually end up dead yourself? (im thinking Kant here)

I guess each has his own answer, and I will side with Kant's categorical imperative.

[Lazul]

If everyone is going to die one day, why is it wrong for humans to kill? Is it wrong for nature to kill people? If we are simply a part of nature, why are we held to a higher standard? If it is simply for reasons of a social contract that we do not kill, what if one chooses not to sign up (figuratively) because they believe that it is in their best interests to kill and gamble thier own lives? Please explain your position.

Couse the world would be a rather fun place if idiots didnt have to kill and hurt people.

[Ironside]

From the most basic viewpoint:
I'm much safer if I got 20 people that I can trust that they won't kill me and cooperate with them, than if I don't. Extend this for a bit and you'll end up like it's today.

[Ja'chyra]

It is a societal law that murder is not allowed and if you choose to live within that society then you are subject to it's laws, if you don't so choose then you will have a hard time finding somewhere to live that a society does not lay claim to.


Is it wrong for nature to kill people?

No, it is not wrong it is just a fact of life, however nature does not murder, there is a difference.


Humans are not part of nature. Humans are more, above the nature. Sure, in a biological sense you can easily argue that Im wrong. But in a philosophical sense, I can argue that I am correct.

You can argue it but I won't believe you ~;) Saying that humans are above nature is a great arrogance and conceit IMO. I don't think that humans have the right to life above all other things, in fact humans are one of the biggest parasites on this planet.

[Byzantine Prince]

Because that would remove their choice to life. I think if I want to die, it's my decision, and it shouldn't be up to some insane person.

This is more about rights then anything else. There is no morality at all to it. We're all going to die.

[R'as al Ghul]

Life is precious in all forms. I object the sentiment that
humans are in any way better/superior than plants or animals.
Killing other life forms should be reduced to the minimum. If one
being needs to kill another to sustain itself, so be it (I'm not vegan)
but killing for fun or sports is disgusting.

On a side note, I saw an interview with the Dalai Lama recently where
he admitted that his encounters with mosquitos often make him dispose his
anti-violence stance. He continued to tell a story from his childhood.
Once during classes he observed a hawk which took one of the Dalai Lama's
tame birds. The DL was shocked and angry and asked his teachers permission
to do something against the hawk. The teacher allowed it and the DL shot
at the hawk with an airgun. The hawk fell to the ground and broke one of his
wings. This pitiful sight caused the DL to take care of the hawk and include
it into the collection of tame birds.

:bow:

[Kagemusha]

R´as al Ghul nailed it.Killing is sometimes necessary,but it should be limited on what´s necessary. :bow:

[Kanamori]

If everyone is going to die one day, why is it wrong for humans to kill?

As Soul pointed out, it is purposefully hastening the end of a life.

[ICantSpellDawg]

but as I had asked, what is the difference?

[Sjakihata]

Just because humans are elevated above nature (fysis) or potentially are anyway, it doesnt mean that we have the right to kill other things. On the contrary - we should be clever enough to preserve it and not kill it. :book:

[Ironside]

but as I had asked, what is the difference?

The difference is that I win (AKA survive) ~D

Or do you want a more philosophical answer?

[Ja'chyra]

but as I had asked, what is the difference?

The difference, as I said, is that society says that you have no right to prematurely end another life.

[Viking]

is it somekind of omni-present knowledge which inhabit every human through time and space? Or is it because our rational part of mind, deduces that if everyone go around killing, you'll eventually end up dead yourself? (im thinking Kant here)

I guess each has his own answer, and I will side with Kant's categorical imperative.

Because of the instincts we got from nature, we don`t like to kill. Otherwise you eat the one you kill, or his/her presence is dangerous for you(your children etc), like if you`re trapped in a cave with only enough oxygen for one, it is pointless to kill from nature`s point of view, you do only harm your specie.
So it`s mainly instincts why we don`t like to kill.

[Kanamori]

but as I had asked, what is the difference?

The murderer has chosen to purposefully hasten the end of an individual that didn't want to die then. Along the sames lines as BP. Nature does not have intent -- to phrase it better maybe, 'nature' (do you mean when people die "naturally" or as in "natural disasters"?) does not have will -- to kill. Although it is regrettable to die (as far as I know, but this is something that can be debated and is a moot point anyways), nobody can be held responsible for what nature does, and we certainly cannot hold nature responsible.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Killing rapist and murderers Is fine by me....but Some one who has done nothing to deserve it does not deserve to die.



You only get one chance at life, People who are not evil deserve to hang on to the chance as long as possible.

[The Stranger]

If everyone is going to die one day, why is it wrong for humans to kill? Is it wrong for nature to kill people? If we are simply a part of nature, why are we held to a higher standard? If it is simply for reasons of a social contract that we do not kill, what if one chooses not to sign up (figuratively) because they believe that it is in their best interests to kill and gamble thier own lives? Please explain your position.

nature oinly kills with one reason: SURVIVAL...humans kill becuz they feel to,cuz they want to, cuz they're ordered to, cuz they like to etc...nothing to do with survival

[Dîn-Heru]

Yes, we are all going to die at one time, but who are you or I to decide when that time has come for someone else.

Nature is nature, what happens happens, it does not kill simply for the sake of killing.

(edit: I mean killing as in murder for some gain or just for fun, not hunting or self-defense)

[yesdachi]

In response to the original question:

I am pretty ok with killing. Plants, animals, even people. From criminals and the dangerous to abortion and assisted suicide. But only under the right circumstances.

I have a very high value for most life, especially of family, friends, and myself. But on the other hand I hold almost no value on the lives of dangerous people or those that threaten my life or the lives of my friends and family.

Some say rational thought separates us from animals. Any murder, rapist, or other dangerous person has shown that they cannot keep control of their rational thought and are no better than an animal, a dangerous animal, and IMO should be treated like one.

I don’t think it is wrong to kill. I think it is wrong to murder or take life frivolously.

[The Stranger]

even dangerous animals get caged in a zoo...what makes a zoo different from a jail

[Xiahou]

If everyone is going to die one day, why is it wrong for humans to kill? Is it wrong for nature to kill people? If we are simply a part of nature, why are we held to a higher standard? If it is simply for reasons of a social contract that we do not kill, what if one chooses not to sign up (figuratively) because they believe that it is in their best interests to kill and gamble thier own lives? Please explain your position.Because you'll go to hell. ~D

[yesdachi]

even dangerous animals get caged in a zoo...what makes a zoo different from a jail
I think i see your point but not the best comparison. Zoos are where we subjugate animals so we can enjoy seeing them without going to their natural environment. Prisons are where we try and separate dangerous people/animals from society while punishing them for crimes committed.

Visiting a zoo is fun, visiting a prison is… scary.

Side not: I am not a fan of zoos. I would rather watch Animal Planet and let the animals stay free. Yes I know some zoos are better than others but I am still not a big fan of wild animals in captivity. Circuses are even worse, captivity plus tricks.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Many animals would be extinct with out zoos though.

[Sjakihata]

Many animals would be extinct with out zoos though.

Lol, worst argument for zoos ever.

[bmolsson]

Its not a question if its right or wrong to kill. In a modern society its rather impractical if everyone goes around and kill each other. In a tribal society killing where a part of life, while today each person have a specific part to play in society.
If we bring in death penalty in to this, it actually might be practical for a modern society to practice. After a sentence, no objections can be filed so case is closed.
With the above cynical view, it should also be added that everyone are more happy if they don't have to go around and be afraid to be killed at any time. We just feel better to know we are safe.....

[econ21]

If everyone is going to die one day, why is it wrong for humans to kill?

If the game is going to end one day, why play it? If the meal is going to be finished sometime, why not bin it? If the race is going to be over sometime, why run it?

I am sorry, I don't see your argument here. My answer, as an atheist, is that life is all there is. Destroy it and you have merely the void. As an ethical person, I can't see anyone person's life as more valuable than another's, so there is a great imperative to protect this most precious thing.

Actually, I fear that people who believe we are not going to die one day - because we will be granted ever lasting life - are potentially less sound on the killing question. Kill them all and let god sort them out, and that kind of thing.


Is it wrong for nature to kill people? If we are simply a part of nature, why are we held to a higher standard?

Wrong and right are normally ascribed to the actions of moral agents, like us. Nature does not do wrong or right, it just does. It's probably got some whacky agenda (or agendas), like natural selection and the survival of the selfish gene. I like to think we can choose our own agenda and most people would rather not have blood on their hands. Yes, it may killing may be the lesser evil but it is still a rather great evil (at least when the victim does not will the death).


If it is simply for reasons of a social contract that we do not kill, what if one chooses not to sign up (figuratively) because they believe that it is in their best interests to kill and gamble thier own lives? Please explain your position.

It's more a matter of moral conscience. And if someone does not have one, I hope the psychiatrists spot him or her before the police have to come looking for them.

[Strike For The South]

If everyone is going to die one day, why is it wrong for humans to kill? Is it wrong for nature to kill people? If we are simply a part of nature, why are we held to a higher standard? If it is simply for reasons of a social contract that we do not kill, what if one chooses not to sign up (figuratively) because they believe that it is in their best interests to kill and gamble thier own lives? Please explain your position.


http://humferier.free.fr/sav/puke.gifhttp://humferier.free.fr/sav/puke.gifhttp://humferier.free.fr/sav/puke.gifhttp://humferier.free.fr/sav/puke.gifhttp://humferier.free.fr/sav/puke.gifhttp://humferier.free.fr/sav/puke.gifhttp://humferier.free.fr/sav/puke.gif

[Kraxis]

Zoos are quite important to us and the animals. Not because they have actually kept certain species alive (and have managed to get some reintroduced into the wild), but because children in particular learn so much more from seeing the animals than watching them on Animal Planet.

To be 3 meters from a Lion, Tiger or Panther is a special thing. You see the majestic creature up close, it is alive, it is formed and it interacts with you (in case you do something, but most people don't dare, yet we know it would). That is very much different from watching yet another emotionless program on TV.

And that is why I will drag my kids to the zoo when I get them. We have imprisoned the animals far away from the natural habitat, the least I can do is to make certain my kids know what they are, and not just some statistic.

I don't know if you have animal parks (basically open zoos where you drive around and the animals walk where they want), but that is a special experience. To have a giraffe stick its head through the window, or have a buffalo grunt at you (then you better get out fast) is fascinating to us Homo Sapiens Urbanus.

[scooter_the_shooter]

Before I would have agreed to kill bread thieves because they are a nuisance.....but I have been convinced otherwise now. Life is more precious than I used to make it out to be.



Karma seems to be real to....After my "kill em all post" I got my tooth chipped.....so If you are thinking about killing some one I would watch out ~;)

[The Stranger]

Many animals would be extinct with out zoos though.

they wouldnt extinct so rapidly if we didnt destroyed their habitat ~;)

[Divinus Arma]

Why is killing wrong?

How about I murder your parents in front of you? I'll tie you to a chair, force open your eyelids with needles and force you to watch. Then I will simply cut their throats and watch you cry as they bleed out.

Then you will know why killing is wrong.


To put it another way, killing is the forceful deprivation of existence. Torture is the deprivation of freedom from pain. If random killing is okay then so is torture. After all, aren't we all going to feel pain anyway?

So then I will torture your parents before killing them. Sound good?

I mean, my GOD man! Killing is horror!


Finally, and just for the sake of this discussion. Consider Kantian ethics if morality is an unacceptable answer. Basically, the concept is this: If everyone did something all the time, would civilization exist?

Theft: No.
Torture: No.
Murder: No.
Lieing: No.
etc.

Sorry for the descriptive post moderators. I hope you will allow it as an illustration to address the absurdity of the question. Questions about evil sometimes require blunt information.

[The Stranger]

that says a marine ~D...DA i get your point...a lame joke it was

lieing: YES...no