So I finally just finished watch the Dark Crystal film after all these years. I hated the main villains when I was a kid and always stopped watching it. I found a copy at wall mart and gave it another go. I enjoyed the film and being older actually gave my a better appreciation of the story and characters I’m even watching the Dark crystal prequel on Netflix right now.
One of the main elements of the film and tv show is the main villains draining the life force of other species to extend their life or repair damage to their bodies.
So what I want to know is if some one created a drug made out of human essence that could heal most health problems and extend your life would you use it? If you were on your death bed or suffering from a debilitating illness would you use this cure knowing what it was made from?
I could see some one giving up their life in some cases. If a rich man was willing to pay a poor man millions of dollars for his wife and kids. I know some guys who would take that deal if their family did not have to suffer with poverty.
I suppose I’d consider it to be roughly on par with cannibalism. But then I get the feeling, just based off your description of it, that it could almost be taken as a metaphor for the sort of things people do for their own benefit and that results in harm to other people, however indirectly, every day. So the extent to which it is moral would, I suppose, depend upon the circumstances, things like what conditions/who this life force was drawn from, what my condition is and how it would be effected, and the social implications of such an arrangement where people’s life force can be so used.
Is it right? Probably not in all but certain extreme cases (like cannibalism). Is it something I would do? shrug here it’s a hypothetical lacking specificity. But in a way, maybe we already do draw off the life force of others for our own benefit, so…?
To me that’s a level of coercion that casts the transaction into moral black areas.
One could come up with situations where taking somebody’s life might be moral - where it’s less buying a person and killing them and more like using the byproducts of a freely chosen assisted suicide. But those are pretty tortured scenarios. Still though, that does give me my baseline: only if the ‘donation’ was freely offered without money or other compensation changing hands, would I feel that accepting it is moral.
In the movie & the show, they kill in obtaining the essence. I’m assuming it is along those lines and not harvesting after they’re dead. That is a different question indeed.
I think you went a different direction than the Op.
Of course the whole idea of prolonging my life or healing my body by extracting some kind of life force out of other human beings’ bodies sounds cruel, abject, repulsive, and all. But if we lived in a world where all these things were available, and we were dying, who knows what our mindsets would really be like. I am not eager to travel into the future.
Isn’t that what everyone/everything does to stay alive, possible exception for things along the lines of lichens?
What do you think you’re doing when you eat?
Is the issue that they’re draining conscious species, or intelligent species, or specifically that they’re draining humans? Because the way you phrased it doesn’t to me seem to make them villains at all.
It’s the basic premise of a vampire movie. What would you be willing to do for health and youth? What would you be willing to do do prevent dying? Most of us like to believe that we would do the moral thing. Then again, here in the real world, none of us has ever actually had to make that choice.
Someone once convinced the Aztecs that human sacrifice was necessary to prevent the destruction of the world. They made strenuous efforts to save the world.
Suppose climate change could be stopped with human sacrifice. Would you be willing to take the high moral ground? Are you sure?
I’d struggle to find a scenario where the taking of someone’s lifeforce to prolong someone else’s would be a morally equitable exchange. In the situation of a rich man paying a poor man’s family for his literal life, I don’t see any gray area. That’s immoral, and it suggests an immoral imbalance of financial resources as well.
It depends on the effect on the life essence donor. If it is like donating blood (a pretty close approximation to life essence for that matter) where the donor feels a bit lethargic afterwards but recovers and is otherwise fine then I wouldn’t have a problem with it. If it kills the donor then that’s a problem. If it has no long term effects but can only be “donated” by babies who can’t give consent then that would be a bit grey.
Even then, I think that grabbing people off the street and drawing their blood while they scream desperately for you to stop might be a tad bit questionable.
If I get to choose who’s life force I take. I’d have no problem with, say, O.J. Simpson or Susan Smith or Eric Robert Rudoph being drained to keep me alive. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? Kim Jung-Un? You-know-who? Yep. Plenty of people that are drainable.