Morality question

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Wootah
Savant
Posts: 9161
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:16 am
Has thanked: 186 times
Been thanked: 105 times

Morality question

Post #1

Post by Wootah »

Suppose you are the king of a country and that country has a small population of jews that you are happy with.

If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out.

Is it moral to protect the Jews or moral to save the refugees?
Proverbs 18:17 The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

Member Notes: viewtopic.php?t=33826

"Why is everyone so quick to reason God might be petty. Now that is creating God in our own image :)."

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Morality question

Post #41

Post by Tcg »

jgh7 wrote: [Replying to post 38 by Tcg]

It literally says the refugees hate the Jews and would force them out overtime.
It still doesn't say that the king knew the refugees would force the Jews out over time. That was the point of my previous post. Given that fact, the moral thing for the king to do at that time would be provide protection for the refugees.

I am of course repeating myself, but I don't know how else to make this point given that you ignored it previously.

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9855
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 189 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Morality question

Post #42

Post by Bust Nak »

Tcg wrote:It still doesn't say that the king knew the refugees would force the Jews out over time. That was the point of my previous post.
Does it need to explicit say that the king knew given the fact that the king was told that the refugees would force the Jews out? Or are you saying merely being told doesn't count as knowing because the information might not be accurate?
the moral thing for the king to do at that time would be provide protection for the refugees.
If it wasn't clear in the OP, then the author made it quite explicit that you cannot do both in a later post:

"I think you mean import the immigrants and save the jews. Sorry the moral dilemma doesn't allow for it."

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Morality question

Post #43

Post by Tcg »

Bust Nak wrote:
Tcg wrote:It still doesn't say that the king knew the refugees would force the Jews out over time. That was the point of my previous post.
Does it need to explicit say that the king knew given the fact that the king was told that the refugees would force the Jews out?
The OP doesn't state that the king was told anything. I seem to be the only one here who is addressing it as it is written.

Or are you saying merely being told doesn't count as knowing because the information might not be accurate?
I'll repeat, the king wasn't told anything at all in the OP.

If it wasn't clear in the OP, then the author made it quite explicit that you cannot do both in a later post:
I am referring to the initial action the king should have taken. What transpired later is a totally different issue.

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9855
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 189 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Morality question

Post #44

Post by Bust Nak »

Tcg wrote: The OP doesn't state that the king was told anything. I seem to be the only one here who is addressing it as it is written.
That just rises a new question: why does the OP need to explicit state that the king was told that the refugees would force the Jews out, given fact that the king was told it?
I'll repeat, the king wasn't told anything at all in the OP.
What do you mean? The king was told the refugees would force the Jews out. It literally says "If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out."
I am referring to the initial action the king should have taken. What transpired later is a totally different issue.
I am also referring to the initial action, doing both is not allowed by the scenario.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Morality question

Post #45

Post by Tcg »

Bust Nak wrote:
Tcg wrote: The OP doesn't state that the king was told anything. I seem to be the only one here who is addressing it as it is written.
That just rises a new question: why does the OP need to explicit state that the king was told that the refugees would force the Jews out, given fact that the king was told it?
The king wasn't told it. Perhaps you need to review the OP and reply once you understand it properly.

What do you mean? The king was told the refugees would force the Jews out.
No, he wasn't. Have you read the OP?

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9855
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 189 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Morality question

Post #46

Post by Bust Nak »

Tcg wrote: The king wasn't told it.
It's literally right there, and I quote, again: "If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out." How can you maintain not being told when it's right there in black and white?
No, he wasn't. Have you read the OP?
Yes he was, Have you read the OP? Should I quote it for you again? "they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out." What seems to be the sticking point, you don't think the "they" was referring to the immigrants? Please be more specific?

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Morality question

Post #47

Post by Tcg »

Bust Nak wrote:
How can you maintain not being told when it's right there in black and white?
Because it is not there in black and white. Pretty simple really.


No, he wasn't. Have you read the OP?

Yes he was, Have you read the OP? Should I quote it for you again? "they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out." What seems to be the sticking point, you don't think the "they" was referring to the immigrants? Please be more specific?
My point is that the king wasn't told anything. It's not complicated at all. Is that specific enough?

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9855
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 189 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Morality question

Post #48

Post by Bust Nak »

Tcg wrote: My point is that the king wasn't told anything. It's not complicated at all. Is that specific enough?
No, because it says so right there in the OP. And I quote "they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out." Be even more specific, why doesn't that counts as being told?

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: Morality question

Post #49

Post by Tcg »

Bust Nak wrote:
Tcg wrote: My point is that the king wasn't told anything. It's not complicated at all. Is that specific enough?
No, because it says so right there in the OP. And I quote "they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out." Be even more specific, why doesn't that counts as being told?
Because of the 57 words in the OP, none of them are the word, "told". There is absolutely nothing in the OP that would lead one to conclude the king was told anything. In fact, given that neither the word "told" nor any synonym of that word appears in the OP, there is no reason to assume any one was told anything.

If I have overlooked the word "told", or any of its synonyms, amongst the 57 words in the OP, fill free to quote in black and white and I'll be glad to reconsider my position.

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 9855
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 189 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Morality question

Post #50

Post by Bust Nak »

Tcg wrote: Because of the 57 words in the OP, none of them are the word, "told". There is absolutely nothing in the OP that would lead one to conclude the king was told anything. In fact, given that neither the word "told" nor any synonym of that word appears in the OP, there is no reason to assume any one was told anything.
Surely the fact that the OP says "they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out" is more than enough reason to assume you was told the Jews would be forced out, if you even need to assume anything as it is literally right there in black and white.
If I have overlooked the word "told", or any of its synonyms, amongst the 57 words in the OP, fill free to quote in black and white and I'll be glad to reconsider my position.
Consider the statement "my car is red."

Have you been told what color my car is, bearing in mind that neither the word "told" nor any of its synonyms, can be found in those 4 words? Is that anything in that simple statement would lead one to conclude you were told what color my car is?

Post Reply