dimreepr

The most believable god, is the one that teaches you to not pick your nose in a pandemic...

How do you know it isn't?

Indeed, karma is unique to you. Do bad things and karma bites your hand, do good things and karma lick's your hand and wag's its tail... 🙏

Is that a sacrifice or a consequence?

What sacrifice? Karma doesn't require a sacrifice... 😉

That doesn't seem very Buddhist to me, he thaught about thing's... 😉 Buddha would have said, the accuser will be punished by karma... The thing is - is it ever right, is different question to the core of the premise; which is, is it right now (with what we know)?

Different thread and a different memory of what was written there. Let's discuss it there. We left jedwood justice a long time ago; besides, up till now there has never been a scenario, as per your justifications, therefore there is zero evidence that it ever could work.

The bottom line is, Kirk is a terrible captain...

That's like asking, if I kill them with enough respect am I allowed to smile... 🖖

We can only play the hand we're dealt; how is that irrelevant to the OP?

Which part of this sentence "sure, if we live forever we'll probably encounter such an unlikely scenario, and you'll be right." is tripping you up? It's a different question: 1. There is absolutely no doubt who the perp is. 2. They ignore all the warnings and cannot be placated. 3. We have no choice but to stop them. 4. And putting an end to their obvious distress, might even be a kindness. OTOH 1. There is always a doubt, when the perp is witnessed by a third party. 2. They might be ignorant of the crime and any amount of persuasion, won't change that fact. 3. Adding to their distress, can never be a kindness...

Another great post +1 I'll just add, the excuse given to justify torture, is a time limit and no other choice; @beeceethink probability over possibilities. If most victim's do not provide the information requested; the chances that you catch the right guy at the right time and get the right information, in time, is vanishingly small; sure, if we live forever we'll probably encounter such an unlikely scenario, and you'll be right...

LOL +1, but maybe he's got a big dick???

There is no land of the free, it's the home of the entitled...

Very interesting +1, I'll watch the rest tomorrow and get back to you. The rugby's about to start... 🤞

There is no similarty at all: Even if I accept that torture is effective (I don't) it's always morally wrong, even if it, luckily, yields results. To kill someone, even at risk of damaging oneself, is on a spectrum of morality; it's a kindness to kill someone who has no choice but to suffer until they die; it's morally repugnant to kill for one's own plearsure. Have you ever tortured someone? I'm guessing the answer is no; people hurting people is normally traumatic, so how do you know that you wouldn't suffer from PTSD? Besides most heroes shy away from being lauded, maybe there's a reason for that; but I wouldn't know, I've never been a hero...

There was the light, and only a few could see...

As @joigus pointed out (+1 BTW) there is a better way, so philosophically speaking there is no reason to step over the moral line other than emotional retribution/revenge. The question's we have yet to address is: The damage our decision will do to the torturer? The damage we do to ourselves, if we find out we've condemned the wrong person? Exactly to the highlighted part. Again, I see a real resemblance between those here claiming the moral highground and claiming there is never ever any right or reason, for torture, to the same supposed moral high ground by those in the justice/punishment thread, in claiming we have no need for jails. In both cases, the sympathies and thoughts by those, seem to be with the perpetrators and criminals and terrorists that may undertake such atrocities, albeit rarely in the current debate. Different question, different thread and a different memory of the claim's made. Don't derail this thread for a cheap shot, I'd be happy to answer you both in the appropriate forum.

If I could, I would...

The myth of invasion...

The rule here is, attack the argument, not the lionfish...

Change is inevitable, the lionfish isn't...

Is it?

That's a very specific set of circumstances, to justify torture: There's a time limit. You would have to know, without doubt, that you have the guilty party on the table; or you're waisting time... You would have to know, without doubt, that the information gained can be trusted; or you're waisting time... I can't be sure that would even justify a 'B' movie... https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/socratic-moral-psychology/wrongdoing-and-damage-to-the-soul/73B3EF2F0D93EC847489578AC0C03C69