Murder.

I think murder is understandable and a acceptable form of survival under extreme circumstances.

Man is no different from other predatory species.

I agree as far as extreme circumstances as concerned.

If a deranged killer comes at you, and there is no alternative to stopping him than murder, that would be acceptable. Plus, if a dangerous fugitive (one who is sentenced to death or life in prison) is released into the public, murder would be a good option.

These are about the only two instances I can see murder being justifiable.

Yeah, people are different than other animals.

And yeah, that has everything to do with language and a community structured by common beliefs and values.

Murder is evil because it causes unnecessary suffering, and because peace is better than violence. It’s not evil because of the intention, or even because of the circumstances – though these are often used to ‘justify’ acts of violence.

Unless justified by the law, murder will never be ‘right’, it will always be a crime. The only higher law would be a law outside of society – that is, a law which isn’t law, a ‘chaotic’ and invisible law (like a command from God.)

Violence and possession is not a higher law than peace and hospitality. In fact, peace has to come before murder. Sure, there was violence prior to human society. But violence done to humans by humans is of a qualitatively different nature than the violence done by animals: usually between rather than within species, usually over necessities, etc. Only human beings can die and be killed for the invisible – and doesn’t this already imply a metaphysics, a pure desire which could not be satisfied by need? Metaphysical desire is like a desire for the good: the desired doesn’t fulfill, but only deepens the desire…

the only way to have peace sometimes is through murder

-Imp

Plus, if two men consensually agree to engage to the death, with full knowledge and acceptance that one will die, that’d be okay too.

I agree. Man came from nature, but there is a difference between being a creature and a monster.

I have always said and still stand by it…Kill all the violent people.

+1 Child molestation (of a very young child) or child rape.

What about murder that is done in the name of survival daily?

If a person had to murder daily to sustain themselves is it then acceptable?

I don’t see any instances where it isn’t justifiable.

Not if it threatens my survival.

How? :slight_smile:

That doesn’t mean anything.

Where is your morality with classism? I bet you use the services of slave laborers everyday you hypocrite.

Oh I get it now! :laughing: If the president is authorized to kill it is alright but if a common person on the street does it we have to execute them because they don’t have executive privelege.

Wow your making tons of sense now. Rock on!

Silly unsubstantiated superstitions of homo sapiens…

Agreed.

Why? :evilfun:

Most kids get tooken away because their parents are incompetent in watching over them like their supposed to.

My utililitarian ethic puts me in the position of advocating murder when it’s extremely practical to the survival of a harmonious species. (I wonder if that’s us).

Either way, debating murder in self defense or defense of someone fairly helpless and innocent is exhausted. I don’t think there’s more to add.

Nonviolently . . . of course?

I do also believe there may be a reasonable justice external to the utilitarian model. That punishment can go beyond reason for the survival of a species. That sometimes doing terrible things should simply have terrible consequences. That said, former criminals that are assuredly now pacified or “made an example of” doesn’t quite cut justice for me. Capital punishment may be acceptable dependant upon the nature of the crime. I see a choir of hymns allover the internet going “kill all the rapists and paedophiles.” Funny, the law seems to be moving the opposite direction. Rehabilitating them like some kind of impounded dog with rabies. Is that democracy?

There is always more then one way to skin a cat. And thus there is almost always more then one way to avoid murder.

I find that limiting my surounding avoids murder. Finding friends with a good heart is a must. But there are times you might go into a situation that puts you in the line of fire. IE tring to tell extreamest islam that their tactics are the same as forced confessions from the police. It doesn’t speak to their heart as why to change, and they merely comply to faster ignore their forcefull hate. How would killing them first help them change their mind?

Neither example is a clear cut instance of murder, although the latter might be depending on the circumstances.

Murder isn’t the mere killing of a person. It’s the unjustified killing of a person.

Killing a person who is an enemy combatant in a war or who physically threatens another’s life or perhaps whose continued existence threatens the lives of other innocent people or who is executed for some crime against society – all these situations and probably others as well seem to at least have some probability of being considered as legitimate, societally approved reasons to kill other persons.

Different cultures have different rules about what is and what isn’t an acceptable reason to kill another person but AFAIK all cultures have some rules in that regard. If they didn’t, that group of people would seem to be pretty well doomed to extinction.

Good point.

I am going to quote myself from another thread:

You can say all you want as to why you believe that other people (edited) shouldn’t attack you but, does any of that mean anything outside of your subjective wants or desires concretely as to why they shouldn’t?

You mean for your moral ideal of a harmonious species.

Exhausted like how?

Why should murder be avoided?