A yes or no public poll on this classic question.
Do Two Wrongs Make a Right?
- Thread starter Prince_James
- Start date
Might you name some examples where you might be morally conflicted as to replying harm with harm?
Stealing a gun and killing someone who was trying to set off a multi-megaton nuclear bomb in the middle of New York City.
Stealing is "wrong". Killing is "wrong". Saving over 12 million people is "right".
Baron Max
So you'd feel morally confused at that time?
Well, I wouldn't ....but many people would be confused, don't you think?
But see, that's one of the problems with your question ...some people might think something is "wrong", while others might not. Ditto for what's "right" and what's not. You've asked a very, very confusing question that has so many "right" answers that it's virtually impossible to answer without typing for weeks about a particular situation. Then, to make it worse, that particular situation doesn't answer some OTHER particular situation.
Baron Max
But see, that's one of the problems with your question ...some people might think something is "wrong", while others might not. Ditto for what's "right" and what's not. You've asked a very, very confusing question that has so many "right" answers that it's virtually impossible to answer without typing for weeks about a particular situation. Then, to make it worse, that particular situation doesn't answer some OTHER particular situation.
Baron Max
Yes, surely. That is why it was asked.
No two wrongs do not make a right, what the second wrong does is make you feel better, it has an emotional reward, nothing more.
I am not against the second wrong depending on circumstances.
I am not against the second wrong depending on circumstances.
TheoryOfRelativity:
Is it not justice to demand compensation?
Is it not justice to demand compensation?
you didn't ask about justice or compenation, you asked if two wrongs make a right
TheoryOfRelativity:
This is true, but this is a rather a question of tit-for-tat, is it not?
This is true, but this is a rather a question of tit-for-tat, is it not?
Interesting. In the first sentence, you stated categorically that two wrongs don't make a right, yet in the last sentence you said that you're not against that second wrong??? Are you confused, or am I?
Baron Max
Does that make justice a "wrong"?
justice can indeed be a wrong, because justice is like 'beauty' as in it is in the eye of the beholder. A matter of perspective.
Example:
Man A kills B's Dog, so B kills A's dog.
Justice has been done, does this make it right?
Why did man A kill man B's dog?
Well sometime ago B's dog bit and injured A's daughter, scarring her. B had no knowledge of this.
SO
Was A justified in killing B's dog for scarring his daughter for life
yes (for arguments sake)
so who is in the right and who is in the wrong?
Has justice been served?
Well A got what he thought was justiuce when he killed B's dog
B got what he thought was justice when he killed A's dog
BUT now A is aggrieved again (over death of his dog this time) so this time he kills B's wife
B then kills A's wife
A is then aggrieved again so he
and so on and so forth
Everyone has some sort of reason for their actions, ask a criminal if he thought what he did was wrong? They rarely ever do. Always they will justify their actions.
So do two wrongs make a right?
no, question of do two wrongs make a right, tit for tat something different.
I sometimes think tit for tat with a severer TAT preferable BUt doesn't make my idea of TAT right. Just means I like things that are not necc right.
So when are you going to finally answer the fuckin' question? ..instead of relaying silly special conditions and situations which seldom have anything to do with anything? Just answer the damned question!
Would you steal a gun and kill someone to prevent that person from setting off a nuclear bomb over NYC? Yes or no?
Baron Max
Stealing a gun is the right thing to do. It's not the wrong thing to do in this situation.
So, this is not a case of "two wrongs."
Huh???? What??? What the fuck are you talking about?? You use the word "stealing", which is already acknowledged by virtually everyone on the planet, they you say it's not wrong???
Wow! You've got some explaining to do.
Baron Max
Isn't stealing the act of taking something that does not belong to you without consent?
In that definition, there is not moral judgement. It doesn't state what makes it wrong or when it is wrong to do so.
Stealing in everyday life is assumed to be wrong because it hurts the person or group of people that it affects. And in general, stealing serves no greater outcome, only a loss. However, in this situation (nuclear bomb).. you might hurt one person, but the reward of doing so greatly overshadows this guy's lose. Therefore it's the right thing to do and it is not an example of "two wrongs make a right."