I just finished watching a good law and order: SVU which boiled down to ethics. So here is a question for you:
Which is the better path: to torture or commit crimes against humanity in order to potentially/grantee’s to save life, or is it better to avoid any breach of ethics and moral side stepping. Where are the lines drawn, what is too far and what is acceptable? How far would you be willing to go in order to gain results that could save lives? Are you willing to make mistakes in order to achieve these results and how would you consciously stand afterwards?
This is a tough question to ask and one that should require deep thought. I’m quite curious to see what you people think. This is one of those no win questions where no matter what you say the answer will be tough – leaving no true right answer.
Which is the better path: to torture or commit crimes against humanity in order to potentially/grantee’s to save life, or is it better to avoid any breach of ethics and moral side stepping. Where are the lines drawn, what is too far and what is acceptable? How far would you be willing to go in order to gain results that could save lives? Are you willing to make mistakes in order to achieve these results and how would you consciously stand afterwards?
This is a tough question to ask and one that should require deep thought. I’m quite curious to see what you people think. This is one of those no win questions where no matter what you say the answer will be tough – leaving no true right answer.
Comment