Saving lives

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

Suppose that just today- the very day you read this, findings breaks out on the eleven-o-clock news.

Doctors have found cures for some of the greatest killers in the world, and coincidentally politics have created incredible strategies for saving lives.

The food distribution is completely changed. Everyone in the third world is provided with first world class food and medicine, nobody starves. Sure we all face cutbacks to luxury.

Cancer, aids, and all diseases are cured.

Military attains the surgical precision in allocating terrorists and putting them to trial. Police attain the surgical precision in allocating murderers and putting them to trial.

In a few days, millions of people die from overpopulation and the planet’s resources are suddenly so vastly industrialized that anything outside of cockroaches are unlikely to survive the next millennium.

Think of all the commercials, all the missions, all the fundraisers, all the sympathy pleas. SAVE LIVES! SAVE HUMAN LIVES!

I don’t see a lot of justificiation for excessive waste like buying an SUV for fun. But I do see justification for human death. One of the painful facts of life.

Is it possible that one of the government conspiracies we all fear, and blame them for lack of sharing resources, is partly that they realize they should accept some harsh facts. And that if they openly admitted this, the controversy would be too strong and the mob would run them out of office.

That they feel, unfortunately but realistically, death should often be encouraged for a nation to survive.

2

I agree completely but a concept that I have difficulty arguing with people who think life should be cherished no matter what. One thing your position directly relates to is the abortion/condom debate. It’s not quite like the disease issue but if we’re assuming terminal diseases being made/left uncured are done so deliberately, then it’s the same principle. Should people stop using condoms because they’re preventing the “miracle of life” from taking place? Should people stop getting abortions because its some macabre twisted thing that’s going to ruin everyone’s lives or is it in fact a blessing when the woman’s earning minimum wage and supporting some other family member(s)?
If we had any more children in our family, me and by brother would never have been able to go to university and hell, even our meals may’ve been irregular at times.
Is the quantity of life more important than its quality? I believe the quality is more important but what would be your argument against those who appeal to pictures of aborted babies and whatnot to reinforce their position?

3

I would tell them that biology outside of our evolved sociological familiarity is terrifying to us because we’ve evolved to fear what we’re not used to.

We don’t see dead fetuses lieing around. They’re not pertinent to our survival. To us they’re disgusting and frightening.

Surely encouraging murder stands to make us warlike, unco-operative- unproductive. But then failing to make borders on the appropriacy of life and death (even fairly arbitrary ones, when we lack other reasoning), can drive us to much more wasteful insanity.

The only way I humbly present myself to prolifers is that I tell them I’d forgive my mom if she aborted me. Oh well. That or based on the circumstances I’ll tell them I’m apologetically on the fence.

4

Really, in a few days, people would die from ‘‘overpopulation’’? How does this ‘‘overpopulation’’ kill, exactly, and how do so many overs get populated in a few days?

What do you mean by ‘‘the planet’s resources are suddenly so vastly industrialized …’’?
If everyone can be provided food, which actually could be the case, how does this vast industrialization necessarily follow?

Are you aware that industrialized nations are generally at zero population growth, excluding immigration, or in decline, largely because without the stresses of third world conditions more value is placed on quality of life.

Sympathy in what form? Fundraisers for what? If everyone is fed, how will these things propose to save human lives?

Death needs no justification, and will follow life without fail, and in sufficient quantity to create a balance. The perception that ‘’… death should often be encouraged for a nation to survive.‘’ is not supported by the facts, i.e. census data from ‘‘first world’’ countries.

I agree that it is quite possible, for some, ‘‘That they feel, unfortunately’’ and unrealistically, that this is the case. It is just as likely that the aggregate effect of people’s actions of self interest create an appearance of conspiracy, though the end result is the same, a lack of cooperation and sharing continues third world stresses that cause excess reproduction.

5

As far as I understand, there is no proof for this. I am not too knowledgeable about it though. In Europe we have to pay farmers not to grow crops to cut back on the food mountains. There are more than enough resources to substain a much larger population than we have now.

6

Thanks for the responses.

Stephenisstillwell-

I admit that the post is very speculative. I didn’t do any real research. Although I do know a few examples where population boom readily followed a steady rise in industry or war victory. I do indeed have greater respect for admiring the quality of life (not in riches) as opposed to quantity. Parents that love their two kids have more of my respect then . . . uhh . . . lemmings.

Mark-

I know there’s some similar arrangments in Canada where farmers can’t compete to “outgrow” one another and won’t gain much profit by having excess growth.

In a way . . . it prevents a steroidal attitude toward crop growth, where we would end up genetically engineering everything and obsessively using chemicals to grow exhaustively. It is indeed absurd that we end up with financial motivation to not grow food in abundance. Another reason to ridicule modern economics.

7

For one thing population levels are dropping so this massive overpopulation thing won’t be happening, even if the hypothetical situation you outlined, if it did happen, its an assumption that human innovation/technological advancement would just stop. I’m sorry, but whatever miraculous technology that could solve all these problems your talking about, could just as easily be turned to innovative ways to make more room for humans.

As to the SUV, SUV’s aren’t just for fun, try crashing into someone in a normal sized car with an SUV, it won’t be YOU whose decapitated.