To be clear, I’m not suggesting we do what I’m about to propose, I just think it’s an interesting ethical/moral thought experiment.

If we could find a lot of people who want to unalive themselves, and say to them: there’s been a disaster and there are a lot of people who are stuck (e.g. a mine collapse, or 9/11 or something like that) and it’s a dangerous situation for rescue workers to go into, since you don’t care if you die we’re gonna send you in… would it be an ethical or moral thing to do? To ask or make people who don’t care if they live or not, to go into a situation that there’s a known high risk that they won’t survive?

(Also, I not asking wether it is a good idea to send such people in or wether it would be effective — I’m only interested in the ethics/morality of such an idea)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 0 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Not at all. Hey, if you can link effectiveness to the ethics, fantastic. All I was saying was I was more focused on the ethics rather than the effectiveness, which I do think is a debate on its own. However, if you can make the case to justify the ethics in relation to the effectiveness, I’ll definitely read it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 19 hours ago (1 child)

    That's my entire case though: It is unethical to choose methods of rescue or other emergency responses that are less effective than the other available methods.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment