riddle me this, authright

  1. Auth left: the embryos, only the rich can afford embryonic treatment like that, and thus should take them out

  2. Yeah, a good example of why IVF is an abomination. Those who think its okay would see nothing wrong with growing human clones to harvest organs from.

  3. If you replace the embryo’s with a pregnant woman, we’re picking the woman. If you replace the toddler with a woman as well, we’re still picking the pregnant woman. If you replace the toddler with two pensioners instead, we’ll continue to pick the pregnant woman.

  4. Ok but the reason the old man is less valuable is obvious, he’s going to die soon and has lived life already. Why is the toddlers life more valuable than 1000 potential embryos? even if 2 of them become birthed humans then* by the previous logic that would be the correct option to choose would it not?

  5. The trolley problem didn't "show" anything though, it doesn't have preset solutions. It's an ethical conundrum, a tool to debate on the nature of responsibility.

  6. Since the embryos were not refrigerated and left in a tank to bake in the sun while the rest of this scenario was set up, it is reasonable to assert that they are dead already.

  7. this tank is actually excellent at maintaining temperature. they can last hours if mot days while keeping the embryos alive

  8. So we have established that the toddler's life is worth at least 1000 times more than a fertilized embryo. If we then assume a linear prison sentencing system meaning that if you murder two rather than one person you get twice the time. With the median prison sentence for murder being 13.4 years in the US that would mean an abortion is worth less than 4.9 days in prison.

  9. There’s actually a physiological study on this (i am grossly paraphrasing), where people were forced to save either a 6 month old or a 5 year old. More times people would save the 5 year old, they think that it’s because they’re already developed, whereas the 6 month old has a higher death chance

  10. I’d hit that fucking toddler no matter what, you could put a serial rapist on the other track and I’m hitting the toddler.

  11. The fact that lives are worth saving doesn't mean that some live aren't worth saving more than others

  12. That's the real response here. I'd save the toddler every time, but that doesn't mean the embryos don't have value. Trolley problems are just a hunt for a gotcha moment.

  13. Making up hypothetical scenarios where there is no right answer by design and then basing your worldview on that is certainly not it. The trolley dilemma is a thought experiment to examine the question of ethics as a study, not a litmus test for the inherent morality of an individual person or an ideology.

  14. I see you avoided answering the question. Obviously, you are a troubled individual, and I can now logically deduce your entire life story from refusal to answer this one question, as well as your entire ethical standards, political beliefs, and what you ate for breakfast yesterday morning.

  15. The scenario is not necessarily framing the hypothetical as a trolley problem. Yes, the trolley is used, but it is asking you to choose one to save and you are forced choose. In a trolley problem, you are asked to choose whether to interfere or not to interfere. Thus, it poses different moral questions than the trolley.

  16. The trolley problem is a way of exploring morality. No moral question really has a right or wrong answer (although we like to pretend they do). A way to explore these topics is by stretching our reasoning to their limits with thought experiments. That’s also a perfectly valid way to build an argument

  17. The trolley problem is inherently flawed because one number of people (the one on the current track) is already in danger, while the other number is not.

  18. Well it's like any other property, if it were my fetus then sure but I wouldn't touch someone else's the same as how I wouldn't step on their lawn

  19. we all know very well that those embryos are doomed to death And the fact that most people do not consider them human and did not save me does not mean that they are not human

  20. The embryos won't be able to survive outside of their mothers' wombs anyway, at least not in some canister with 999 others. It simply makes more sense to save the toddler. Plus, the fact that you have to come up with a completely batshit and unrealistic situation to try and prove someone is a hypocrite, probably means you're grasping at straws.

  21. How much convenience is worth a life? It is likely the case, that by donating a sum of money, less than that which would be used to safely go through a pregnancy, (not even taking into account the actual pain and risks that a pregnancy brings) could save a life somewhere in the world. Should such money be forcibly distributed?

  22. What're you gonna do with frozen embryos, short of having the most macabre popsicle party this summer? If that is the plan, of course, it's worth losing the kid.

  23. Pro choicers are like "what if a rube goldberg machine impregnates a woman while holding a gun to her head to kill her meanwhile a toddler is dangling on a branch over the Grand Canyon with 100 IVF embryos in their backpack, if you save one the other immediately dies, what are ya gonna do then eh?"

  24. I wanna know how did they even get 1000 fertilized human embryos and who is the irresponsible mother of that baby.

  25. This idea that a pro-lifer wouldn’t save a frozen embryo over a toddler has always been founded in the mistaken belief that the only important part of conception is a fertilized egg. The fact is that without a mother to carry the embryo, it’s inert.

  26. Let's say someone has an ectopic pregnancy, which is where the egg attaches outside the uterus, meaning if it develops it will kill both the fetus and the mother.

  27. Well, I wouldn’t pull the lever. Clearly the toddler isn’t tied down, he move and I can pick up the embryos. Also, I hope people don’t think this is a good argument. Many of us prolifers aren’t consequentialists or utilitarians.

  28. This argument is stupid. It is merely an appeal to emotion. If you think about it rationally, you will come to the conclusion that the 1000 embryos are the better choice to save. Whenever someone says this, however, they are merely faced with another appeal to emotion. "How could you ever look the toddler's parents in the eyes and say you chose not to save their son?" In reality, this same appeal to emotion can be applied to the regular trolley problem. The only difference is that people would have a difficult time accepting that saving the embryos was the right choice if they didn't believe the unborn are humans.

  29. No, it is an attempt to get people to match their actual idea of morality with what they say it is. If you ask 1000 people to define morality, in 99% of the cases, you will either get a circular definition, or a definition which would direct them to do things they obviously wouldn't agree with. In the latter case, the easiest way to resolve that discrepancy is to bring up those scenarios.

  30. Ah, yes. The ridiculous hypothetical. The last hope of the brainless lefty who doesn’t have an actual argument to make.

  31. Taking situations to their extremes are how you test someone's moral framework. It's actually Phil 101 shit and we've done it for literally hundreds of years.

  32. Evil is Evil. Lesser, greater, middling… Makes no difference. The degree is arbitary. The definition’s blurred. If I’m to choose between one evil and another… I’d rather not choose at all.

  33. I love this problem because it's always presented like it actually means something. It's a false equivalence. But for whatever reason, the presenter always thinks they've trapped there opponent with some adamantine logic. No pro-lifer is making the case that some lives shouldn't be chosen over other lives in what amounts to a triage situation. We've been employing triage rules since the beginning of time, and it has yet to be argued that choosing to save one life over another due to necessity is murder or unethical. You know what IS murder and unethical? Choosing to end a life for the sake of another's convenience.

  34. Kill the toddler. If the toddler walked out onto the tracks and his/her parents aren't there, that means the parents are fools. They're like "Oh, little Timmy, go play" and he runs off to get hit by a trolley because his parents were on their phones not paying attention to their child.

  35. So, statistically speaking there's going to be 3 of those embryos that'll become doctors, 4 will become lawyers, 45 will become small business owners, and 62 will end up with >$2 million in assets when they die.

  36. May I propose a theory, what if, and bear with me, this hypothetical, along side the trolley problem as a whole is absolute nonsense, yes a toddler is automatically more valuable than any number of frozen embryos, no that doesn’t make abortion good or right. Lol

  37. The whole foundation of a lot of anti abortion arguments, is that at the point of conception you have a human life deserving of all the rights and protections of its mother. If you are someone who believes that but says you’ll save the toddler because their more valuable - then you’ve just completely eviscerated the entire basis for your argument.

  38. stupid ass question. In the situation you would pick your emotional option which is the child, you can see it crying and scared. The other one is a can with 1000 baby’s in it that show no emotion.

  39. Easy, 1000 frozen embryos given a longer time horizon, it’s obvious that I saved more lives. Problem with this question is that you tend to be too impatient to watch the forest grow from seeds. 🤷‍♂️

  40. Save the kid because I believe in heartbeat law, unless the ambryos are the last hope for the survival of humanity. But considering the fact that there is a jug full of human eggs, it might already be the case.

  41. Well this is similar to the regular trolley problem. Deaths of one versus deaths of many. Either way, you have done something that has resulted in the death of another.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin