This will be an ethical question thread, that will relate mainly to religious beliefs and ethics. Hopefully it will be a good idea and people will want to play.
Each week I will present a topic, and you may discuss it, and bring your morality into the question.
This week: soldiers have come to search your house! They will kill you and eat you if they find you. You are hiding in the closet farther away from the door than your friend who is hiding underneath a sofa. The people eating soldiers stop in front of the sofa, and start bending over slowly to see if there is anyone underneath it. You see this through the crack in the door. You have 2 choices to jump out, scream and run out the door to save your bestest friend in the whole world, or you can watch them drag him away.
basically would you save yourself? or would you save your friend.
This is usually true, however sometimes we need a short recess from intellectual endeavors and troll hunting is a praise worthy past time
trolls give you aids. and I don't like getting aids.
sometimes trolls can be disguised and seemingly be a "overly philosophical *sshole" such as the person who wrote this
Flag
This is not a realistic question, as why would there be only you? In a true scenario there would be several medics as well as several police officers. Ill just ad "Non realistic" to my list... Plus, you would be able to save both if your cleaver enough or if the situation allows it...
The probable ethical thing to do would be to grantee the safety of the man. Considering you have to be bleeding rather heavily to die, especially from one wound, then he must be gushing blood several feet. By the way, how did he get a neck wound in a car crash? Anyway, since you seem to be alone it would be pointless to try and save your wife, since you don't have backup and you don't seem to have tools. Call it an early divorce.
But of course logically in a true scenario not only would you always to to save both people, but you would have more people who would be trained in the field of medicine, plus the ambulance full of medical tools. You would be able to save the man and have a chance of saving your wife. This should go into the game forum, as it has no bearing I can see on the WEPR....
in my last question. sadly to say the troll bites the hand that feeds it. you get angry ect. whatever. which is why I've developed a policy to not feed trolls. because once you get bitten you just want to hit something. but you can't b/c you want to do bodily harm to the person. so which is why I stopped caring/feeding trolls
Ah, first time on AG forums, apologies for not answering the right question:
I'd just let her know gently that i'm going and it's just the way things have to be. if she's not at all reasonable and forces me to stay then i'd simply work at home to help the war effort...repair guns, dig through junk for goods, donate goods like wood and cloth to help the locals, build bombs, etc.
in my last question. sadly to say the troll bites the hand that feeds it. you get angry ect. whatever. which is why I've developed a policy to not feed trolls. because once you get bitten you just want to hit something. but you can't b/c you want to do bodily harm to the person. so which is why I stopped caring/feeding trolls
So you are being a hypocritical, idiotic, troll by trolling said "troll"?
wow. that's not a troll. that's a moron. consider that exhibit B in my case for eugenics.
You are also a hypocritical, moron, troll by trolling someone you think is a "troll"
Didn't I make it clear that I didn't think that person was trolling?
Trolling: a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community
The person in question was not entirely off topic, was not extraneous in their remarks (although they were taking the situation given out of context) and did not seem inflammatory. Simply put, the response was not trolling per se, but simply an ignorant albeit heroic effort at debating a query prior to an attempt at a response.
Am I hypocritical? In what sense?
And I'm a moron as well? Let's look at that one more closely:
Moron is a controversial term once used in psychology to denote a category of mental retardation. (Specifically to describe someone with a mental age between the ranges of 8 and 12 years.) The term was closely tied with the American eugenics movement.
you still trolled them after stating that it was a negative thing to troll
Where did I make that assertion?
By trolling after you stated it was improper.
Two part question. 1. How was I trolling? 2. Again, where did I assert trolling to be improper?
It seems like an appropriate thing to call you, considering you called said person a moron.
So by using a term in the context in which they displayed the properties qualifying the usage of said term, you find it appropriate to use the same term in retaliation without knowledge of its meaning or understanding of the context in which it was used?
Regardless. End of discussion. We are too far off topic. Some are still waiting to respond to the query put forth by this thread, and the rest of us are awaiting the new query which will be brought forth tomorrow. Until then if you wish to argue technicalities and semantics I am more than happy to do so with you in the proper venue. We can find a thread where such conversation is appropriate, or take it to the messages. Up to you.
This is usually true, however sometimes we need a short recess from intellectual endeavors and troll hunting is a praise worthy past time
Right there.
Two part question. 1. How was I trolling? 2. Again, where did I assert trolling to be improper?
You called said person a moron, by the way did you notice all my posts dissipated?
And for the second, I will point towards the first quote.
So by using a term in the context in which they displayed the properties qualifying the usage of said term, you find it appropriate to use the same term in retaliation without knowledge of its meaning or understanding of the context in which it was used?
The word here being a common word, and the meaning already known, it is quite fine. It was posted entirely to insult you for insulting m... the person.
Regardless. End of discussion. We are too far off topic. Some are still waiting to respond to the query put forth by this thread, and the rest of us are awaiting the new query which will be brought forth tomorrow. Until then if you wish to argue technicalities and semantics I am more than happy to do so with you in the proper venue. We can find a thread where such conversation is appropriate, or take it to the messages. Up to you.
You started it. I was only defending the innocent guy who was just giving constructive criticism.
