Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Baron Morte
Peter singer says its ok to do just that, but the grand area of knowledge that emcompasses discussions about philosophy, ethics and morals canīt even give a straigt answer if it is right or wrong to let 10 paedophiles fulfill their life objective of having sex with a 10 yr old ( its the happiness of 10 people versus the subjective disgust of one person), or a poor man stealing a rich person. Therefore there really are no answears when it comes to that
What there is is how many people would found outragerous the rapists and thieves go free, or how many people would simpatize with the paedos suffering and the poor manīs starvation. Based on that laws are made, and social customs.
|
But to my mind morals are about what's in the best interest of society. Allowing 10 paedo's free reign with one child might be of greater individual value* (10 people's happiness vs 1 person's despair) but does it benefit society as a whole (increased productivity of the paedophiles involved, less resources spent on policing etc)? I don't think so.
*i would argue the point though as 1 child wont be enough as after 5 years or so the child will be too old. You could always share the child amongst more adults but then i suspect they wouldn't get enough play time and as such their happiness wouldn't be as great.