Lifeboat ethics - Real Lifeboats!

[Chronos]

Quoth John Mace:

And when you call this the “base point” on the abortion issue when abortions to save the life of the mother are a tiny, tiny fraction of all abortion performed is, to put it mildly, puzzling.

That depends on whether you count treatment for an ectopic pregnancy as “abortion”. But I’m not aware of anyone who wants to legally prohibit such treatment. Even Catholic Church-run hospitals will terminate an ectopic pregnancy, albeit after much wringing of hands.

As for the literal lifeboat scenario, the real moral failing is on whomever designed the lifeboats for the ship in the first place, to not have enough capacity. They guaranteed that, in the event of an accident, some people would die: After that, it’s just a question of whom.

[carnivorousplant]

@TriPolar

When do you grab an oar and start hitting people in the water to keep them from capsizing the boat?

Right away.
Just as hard as I can.
I suppose rotating in and out of the boat would be fair, but I doubt everyone would cooperate.

[Jonathan_Chance]

And, honestly, that’s the essence of humanity right there. We’re tribal to a degree but not that far past it.

John Mace’s solution upthread is fine but utterly impractical in the stress of the situation. Yes, there will be some who volunteer but most will not and will fight tooth and nail to win (not earn) their continued existence.

[Mr.Excellent]

@Jonathan_Chance

And, honestly, that’s the essence of humanity right there. We’re tribal to a degree but not that far past it.

John Mace’s solution upthread is fine but utterly impractical in the stress of the situation. Yes, there will be some who volunteer but most will not and will fight tooth and nail to win (not earn) their continued existence.

Yup. Rightly or wrongly, I doubt very much that I could bring myself to die for you. Or even your children.

[MeanJoe]

@Trinopus

For a while, in the 70’s (anyway) this was dealt with as a “thought experiment” (not a practical one!) in high schools, at least in some school districts in the U.S. A scenario was constructed, and the students were asked to explore the moral questions involved. Should someone be sacrificed to save the rest? Or was that unsupportable?

Then…the religious right heard of it, and got the very exploration of the question banned from schools! The very existence of “situation ethics” was, to their mind, so taboo as to be disallowed for school discussion!

Some of that religious interpretation from my teenage years spent in Christian Schools. This is Steve Taylor, a popular Christian “rock” musician at the time and his “humorous” take on Lifeboat.

Steve Taylor’s Lifeboat Video

You can fast forward to 2:59 if you want to get to the actual “song” portion.

MeanJoe

[XT]

[QUOTE=Mr. Excellent]
Yup. Rightly or wrongly, I doubt very much that I could bring myself to die for you. Or even your children.
[/QUOTE]

It’s hard to say that until you are faced with the situation. If you had to make a choice between hitting a 4 year old little girl on the head with a boat paddle, or throwing a 10 year old little boy off the boat then it might change your perceptions. And, of course, if they were your kids then that might change the equation entirely.

These types of ethics questions have always been silly to me, because what people say they will do when sitting calmly at their computer munching Doritos and sipping a Dr Pepper is going to be completely different than what they do in the chaos and stress of such a situation. People react in a panic in very different ways than they do when they can look at something from the outside in a detached manner.

[QUOTE=Jonathan Chance]
And, honestly, that’s the essence of humanity right there. We’re tribal to a degree but not that far past it.
[/QUOTE]

I’d even go further…when in situations like this, it’s family first, then clan then tribe, with ‘humanity’ as an overall concept being far down the list. To a certain degree cultural ‘instincts’ are going to come into play as well. It’s hard for most people to not want to help a child or baby…or a pregnant mother. But panic is also a huge factor and in such a situation panic is going to over ride just about everything else and the desire for self preservation is going to take over in many, most or even all of the people involved. They aren’t going to be thinking rationally about in the boat or in the water rotations or rationing food and water…they are going to be thinking about personal survival if they are alone, or family survival if their spouse or children (or grandchildren or other immediate family members) are involved.

-XT

[TriPolar]

@xtisme

It’s hard to say that until you are faced with the situation. If you had to make a choice between hitting a 4 year old little girl on the head with a boat paddle, or throwing a 10 year old little boy off the boat then it might change your perceptions. And, of course, if they were your kids then that might change the equation entirely.

These types of ethics questions have always been silly to me, because what people say they will do when sitting calmly at their computer munching Doritos and sipping a Dr Pepper is going to be completely different than what they do in the chaos and stress of such a situation. People react in a panic in very different ways than they do when they can look at something from the outside in a detached manner.

That’s what makes them interesting to me.

I’d even go further…when in situations like this, it’s family first…then clan then tribe, with ‘humanity’ as an overall concept being far down the list…

-XT

Definitely.

From Cheers:

Carla: If the Brady Bunch crashes in the Andes who would they eat first?
Woody: Well probably the maid, 'cause she’s not kin..
Cliff: Yeah, but if they were smart they would ask her the best way to prepare herself.

[John_Mace]

@Jonathan_Chance

John Mace’s solution upthread is fine but utterly impractical in the stress of the situation. Yes, there will be some who volunteer but most will not and will fight tooth and nail to win (not earn) their continued existence.

I thought we were discussing what we should do, not what we’d actually do. If you want the latter, then the possibilities are endless.

[TriPolar]

@John_Mace

I thought we were discussing what we should do, not what we’d actually do. If you want the latter, then the possibilities are endless.

Don’t you think this is a case where that disparity is rather large? I think discussing both is a necessity, since ethics should be based on realistic expectations of human behavior, unlike morality which can be much more arbitrary.

[Whambulance]

@TriPolar

So the ship has gone down, and there you are in the stormy sea in a lifeboat, with more passengers aboard than the safe limit for the boat, and more are out in the water clinging to the boat, trying to pull themselves in, and on the verge of capsizing it, and you can’t swim.

When do you grab an oar and start hitting people in the water to keep them from capsizing the boat?

Illegal? No. You have the right to save your life, even it means killing another. This is recognized in both domestic and international law.

Immoral? Unclear. Even though there are moral philosophies that would say no, let everybody drown rather than saving yourself, I don’t think most people would call it immoral as long as it was absolutely necessary to stay alive.

So why bring it up?

First, I don’t know if my assertion that most people wouldn’t find it immoral under life and death circumstances is correct.

Second, I find this to be the base point of the abortion issue. I cannot in anyway understand the idea of a total ban on abortions that would cause the loss of both a pregnant woman and her unborn child (or whatever you want to call it). I personally find such a position unreasonable in all respects. That same woman could give birth and then legally kill her child later if the child posed an imminent threat to her life.

Interesting correlation. While I agree with you on all points I’m tempted to think that those that would disagree would place the child inside the boat with the mother … her having to throw it out to save her own life. A bit harder to argue than the premise that your boat has a capacity of one and the baby is clawing his way onboard.