VonNoble

Racing with a tiger

Recommended Posts

Today in class there was a simple question:

 

True or false - it is wrong to hurt an innocent child.

 

I assumed that was a no-brained true statement...:(   Silly me! 

 

Anyone want to jump in with an example of why that is not true?

 

von

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slapping a child's hand to keep it out of a fire. Giving a child a vaccination shot. Kicking a child for being ugly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mererdog said:

Slapping a child's hand to keep it out of a fire. Giving a child a vaccination shot. Kicking a child for being ugly. 

1.  Slapping a child to alert it to danger or prevent harm got tossed by the teacher.... because she felt the inclusion if the word innocent indicated the child was not “doing” anything to warrant action 

 

several in class did did not agree with that 

 

2. Good on you.... none of us came up with a vaccination .... at the rate she was tossing up our suggestions.... I am guessing she would tell us (after the fact) not all kids mind shots.... this one did not. :P I  sure some lunacy like that would have happened 

 

We as a class had trouble defining wrong.... hurt and innocent......oh and for awhile... we could not even agree on the word child

 

One student did come up with an argument that stopped us being rebuffed for a second hour....

 

von

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VonNoble said:

several in class did did not agree with that 

It is a fairly bad definition. Still, at no point did I say the child was putting its hand in the fire. Perhaps the fire was moving towards the child. Slapping the hand simply triggers the reflexive draw-back that prevents the burn.

The moral principle at work is the notion that preventing harm is justification for causing hurt. Similar to the justification for enduring the discomfort caused by exercise.

Edited by mererdog
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, mererdog said:

It is a fairly bad definition. Still, at no point did I say the child was putting its hand in the fire. Perhaps the fire was moving towards the child. Slapping the hand simply triggers the reflexive draw-back that prevents the burn.

The moral principle at work is the notion that preventing harm is justification for causing hurt. Similar to the justification for enduring the discomfort caused by exercise.

I do not have any issues with your assessment.... I find the entire class frustrating a good portion of the time.

 

The argument that finally stopped it was made by one of my IT major teammates...

 

His response was a tiger was hurting the child....the tiger needed to eat....it is irrelevant the child is innocent.... to a tiger a child is just meat.... which finally gave us a reprieve 

 

When my teammate pointed out nothing in the original question stated a human was hurting the child we could finally move on....

 

von

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next problem....

 

True or false....if you drop you pen it will hit the ground?

 

von

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, mererdog said:

It is a fairly bad definition. Still, at no point did I say the child was putting its hand in the fire. Perhaps the fire was moving towards the child. Slapping the hand simply triggers the reflexive draw-back that prevents the burn.

The moral principle at work is the notion that preventing harm is justification for causing hurt. Similar to the justification for enduring the discomfort caused by exercise.

Hurt could be defined as harm. Harm the child to prevent harm to the child?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is bit enough information to answer the question. Is the pen tied to a helium balloon? Am I in the space station? Is there something between the pen and the ground? Are you planning to catch the pen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Brother Kaman said:

Hurt could be defined as harm.

It could be. Based on the definition given for innocent, all bets are off.

The distinction I was making is between pain and damage. Some things are painful (hurt) but do not damage (harm), while some things harm (cause damage) but do not hurt (cause pain). Its an imoirtant distinction in my personal moral decision-making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Brother Kaman said:

Hurt could be defined as harm. Harm the child to prevent harm to the child?

My team tried that... it seemed reasonable to us as well....

thx

von

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mererdog said:

There is bit enough information to answer the question. Is the pen tied to a helium balloon? Am I in the space station? Is there something between the pen and the ground? Are you planning to catch the pen?

Well I am feeling a bit better that other people find these hypotheticals lacking

 

von

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mererdog said:

It could be. Based on the definition given for innocent, all bets are off.

The distinction I was making is between pain and damage. Some things are painful (hurt) but do not damage (harm), while some things harm (cause damage) but do not hurt (cause pain). Its an imoirtant distinction in my personal moral decision-making.

My social work major team mate noted not all harm is physical...... it felt like a mental yo-yo in class today

 

von

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, mererdog said:

There is bit enough information to answer the question. Is the pen tied to a helium balloon? Am I in the space station? Is there something between the pen and the ground? Are you planning to catch the pen?

Oh I forgot.... the IT guy stood up and dropped his pen..... on the desk.... again providing us an escape to the next one....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, VonNoble said:

True or false.....

 

All sunsets are beautiful.

Only if someone sees it.

 

3 minutes ago, VonNoble said:

My social work major team mate noted not all harm is physical...... 

A very important point for any pacifist to remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, VonNoble said:

True or false.....

 

All sunsets are beautiful.

 

We were allowed to move on....after someone noted the earth still rotates during a thunderstorm with pouring rain.... we cannot “see” the sunset.... so we have no opinion re: the beauty of it.

 

Along the way we wasted much time discussing sunsets by beaches being beautiful always....what is Beauty.... and how awful life must be for people who add color-blind 

von

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VonNoble said:

Along the way we wasted much time discussing sunsets by beaches being beautiful always....what is Beauty.... and how awful life must be for people who add color-blind 

None of that is a wasre of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now