Moral Dilemma No1. THOMSON'S VIOLINIST
The question:
You wake up in hospital, next to a world famous violinist connected to you with various tubes. You've been kidnapped by the Music Appreciation Society. Aware of the maestro's impending death, they hooked you up to the violinist. If you stay connected, he will be totally cured in nine months. You are unlikely to suffer harm. No one else can save him. Do you have an obligation to stay connected?
The results:
25 percent said Yes, 75 percent said No of 57,779 votes cast.
The blurb: by Daniel Sokol (NOT by me)
As expected, most of you believe it's morally acceptable to disconnect yourself, but a significant minority think otherwise. It would be interesting to find out how you selected your answer. Is there a duty to save the violinist? Does he have a right to life that would be violated by disconnection, or does he just have a right not to be killed? Is unplugging yourself killing him or letting him die, and does it actually matter morally which it is? I suspect many will say that you are not killing him, but letting him die. For some people, this is how Thomson's case differs from abortion. When you abort a foetus, you are not just letting the foetus die. There is usually an intention to kill the foetus, whereas there's no intention to kill the violinist. Those who remain connected need to confront the following issue: as I write, thousands are dying of preventable diseases in Sudan. The World Health Organization says that funds are urgently required. You could save some of them, just like the maestro, by giving up far less than nine months. Does consistency require you to make some personal sacrifice to others whose lives could also be saved by your actions?
About Me
- CyberKitten
- I have a burning need to know stuff and I love asking awkward questions.
3 comments:
Let's perform the thought experiment another way. Suppose you and the violinist have the roles reversed: you will die if you're unplugged. What would you want the violinist to do?
There is a difference though, between growing naturally in a womb, then killing a baby. I'm not saying there aren't parallels, but it seems to me the analogy is far from perfect.
It seems to me the analogy is positively ridiculous. But hey, i felt it was moral to let him die anyway:-)
Suzanne, I may have wanted him to stay connected to me but NOT forcefully. I have no right to force someone to give up their life for nine months or even a minute.
A fetus is a parasite, not an individual being.
Post a Comment