Is it morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people?
I would think the affirmation would advocate some sort of utilitarianism and would look to the greatest good.
However, does anyone have an alternative moral theory that would justify doing so?
The negation would look to deontology and the impermissibility of using people as means to and end.
Is it ever justified to use people as a means to an end?
What are you thoughts on the topic in general?
Any insight would be highly appreciated.
Thank you
Re: Is it moral to kill to save more?
For me, the only answer is no. If you start to go into the intricacies, then definitely people will start finding their own justifications.
Re: Is it moral to kill to save more?
You shouldn't kill any **inocent **person.
But if you had to kill an enemy soldier to save the lives of a village or something then fine go ahead.....
even if you had no issue with the chap, he was an enemy combatant so blasting him is fine!
Re: Is it moral to kill to save more?
NEver
Re: Is it moral to kill to save more?
Moulana Moudoodi has covered this subject at length in his book Tafheem ul Quran.
Re: Is it moral to kill to save more?
These kind of questions are just not based on reality.
Innocent is innocent and one innocent is equal to one million innocents or even more. Number has no value.
Innocent can be considered as zero.
Speaking in other way:
**
A million zeros will still be equal to one zero.**