Moral situation.

DeletedUser857

Guest
So my little sister (7 years old) sees a fly stuck in a spiders web, still alive. She wants to save it lest it get eaten by the spider, so I say "okay fine, we'll release the fly BUT if we release the fly the spider will starve to death.

Which poses the question? Do we have (as sentient species) the right to decide who would live or die in that situation?

Or is it just mean imposing that deep question on a 7 year old? :icon_wink:

<execute.discussion.exe>
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I think it's a good idea to pose that kind of question to a 7 year old, it will encourage them to think more about the consequences of their actions. Surely this is good preparation for later life.

As for the question itself, I think that unless we have been responsible for the situation in some way we have no right to intervene. The most moral thing to do is to let nature run its course.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Hmmm, interesting,

Well I would guess you release the fly because then the fly lives and hopefully the spider would find more flys. But then if the spider didn't find another fly it would starve to death as well and the fly could get caught in another spiders web and die anyway, in these cases they both die so we are back to square 1 anyway.

intersesting, I doubt we will come to a conclusion about this thread...

EDIT:

Yes actually I agree with adam about nature running it's course, that is the best thing to do in this situation
 

DeletedUser2765

Guest
sweetdeath20 said:
So my little sister (7 years old) sees a fly stuck in a spiders web, still alive. She wants to save it lest it get eaten by the spider, so I say "okay fine, we'll release the fly BUT if we release the fly the spider will starve to death.

Which poses the question? Do we have (as sentient species) the right to decide who would live of die in that situation?

Or is it just mean imposing that deep question on a 7 year old? :icon_wink:

<execute.discussion.exe>
Click to expand...

As a sentinent species, we only have a right to fix what we've done. To disrupt the natural order of things is to cause an imbalance. All we can do is make sure we don't screw up the planet because of what we do. Let nature do its work, there's a reason why its been around for millions of years.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
sweetdeath, what was your sister's answer? Did she arrive at one? I'm interested to know how a 7 year old might answer...
 

DeletedUser857

Guest
adam1503 said:
sweetdeath, what was your sister's answer? Did she arrive at one? I'm interested to know how a 7 year old might answer...
Click to expand...

She said...errrr I didnt think of that

We ended up coming to the joint conclusion that we should let nature proceed as it intended.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Was this just a hypothetical (I think this is how you spell hypothetical?) situation or did it really happen?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Oh, just saw your edit, ok, so did she agree with you as sson as you told he it would be best to let nature run its course or what did she think at first?
 

DeletedUser857

Guest
She stalled at that question- it took prompting for her to come to the afformentioned conclusion.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Think of it...

Why save One fly when there are several thousand (maybe even more) out there and in the same house being eaten by spiders every day...

I'd let the spider eat the fly, there's nothing much we can do by saving the fly save letting it spawn a few hundred more of themselves.

And I might be a bit Harsh and down to earth but that's the basic gist of it.


/Back to moral part:

It's good to put these questions to young people, gets them thinking more outside the box early on so later in life they can think more logically or something along those lines.
 

DeletedUser857

Guest
hmm but then consider I dont like spiders so would it not be better for me to release the fly so the spider dies?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Well, do you prefer several dozen maggots and flies to spiders?

I think this could go on, but if it's your own personal preference than letting one fly escape from a spider, and in the process inevitably destroying its web, wouldn't cause much of an effect to the population of that spider anyway so it would be better for you if it made you more comfortable, but not better for the people who may encounter the fly's offspring.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
well now, if you think that, I would think it would be morally better to still leave nature run its course, even if I h8ed spiders so much would you actually starve it to death, maybe stamp on it, maybe flick it, but starve it til it dies?
 

DeletedUser857

Guest
/dissappeares in a puff of logic

Ive been argued out of my own thread. There really is no generalised answer for this.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I suppose it is personal opinion, but you asked what is the moral thing to do and the answer to that is to leave it, but now you're arguing about other things, such as u h8ing spiders, i would presume it is personal opinion
 

DeletedUser857

Guest
Which is why I have officialy cornered myself by way of the argument, and therefor can have no further part in it.

Que next thread.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Mods:

With this sub-forum now that the disscussion is finished do the threads get locked? or left open?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top