What would you do if you 'knew'?

Although tyrants have no mercy on me or respect for my Liberty, guess what?

I still respect their Liberty and will have mercy on them.

I will not allow negative to force me into negative. I will respond with something good.

I want to end the cycle of violence and murder, not perpetuate it.

Let's make this absolutely clear.

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by Mouldilocks


The intention is good, right? Does that justify it?

Tough questions to resolve, with less than three days to work with... Aren't they?

The road to hell is paved in 'good intentions'.

Hitler had good intentions for Germans.
Stalin had good intentions, he wanted to purify the USSR.
Mao wanted to purify China with his good intentions.

And what are we doing in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Good intentions.

reply to post by muzzleflash


This particular man is not, nor will be a "tyrant" ... He will remain unknown... Maybe you just read the Hitler question and skipped the rest??

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by Mouldilocks


The intention is good, right? Does that justify it?

Tough questions to resolve, with less than three days to work with... Aren't they?

Very. And I hope I never find myself in the position where I am the one to have to resolve them.

Have any of the responses to your thread swayed your own stance on the matter?

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Although tyrants have no mercy on me or respect for my Liberty, guess what?

I still respect their Liberty and will have mercy on them.

I will not allow negative to force me into negative. I will respond with something good.

I want to end the cycle of violence and murder, not perpetuate it.

Let's make this absolutely clear.

So you would sacrifice millions on the altar of your conscience? Not condemning, just asking. I know that I would kill a pedophile who touched either of my kids. So, how do I not kill to save their lives?

There is no moral dilemma, no quandary of philosophy.

You either believe that murder can be a means to an end, or you do not.

I do not.
I do not like that end.

I want a new beginning.

The 'final solution' is not acceptable for anyone. Not even the devil himself.

To win this war you must stand your ground. Good does not commit evil to accomplish good.

Originally posted by Mouldilocks

Have any of the responses to your thread swayed your own stance on the matter?

Not yet, but any and all posts are appreciated, regardless of "stance"

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
So you would sacrifice millions on the altar of your conscience? Not condemning, just asking. I know that I would kill a pedophile who touched either of my kids. So, how do I not kill to save their lives?

So it's my fault that others murder? Since I didn't murder?

You do see the circular logic here don't you?

Do you really think that killing a dictator solves anything?

"New boss same as old boss" - should ring a bell.

What are you going to kill every human on Earth until only you are left? Someone will always replace them.
Look at Rome, look at the Byzantines, people thought killing the tyrant would solve everything.
But then they became the Next Tyrant on the block.

The solution to preventing murder is not to commit it yourself.

reply to post by muzzleflash
Good does not. But I am an evil, sinful man. If I knew this to be true, I would have to believe that God was telling me. Is he telling me for no reason? Is he telling me just so I can kiss my children one more time before I allow them to be killed?

reply to post by muzzleflash

This is not about a single tyrant. This is about a man setting out to kill BILLIONS of people. Huge difference.

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

This particular man is not, nor will be a "tyrant" ... He will remain unknown... Maybe you just read the Hitler question and skipped the rest??

Look, Hitler probably didn't kill many people at all.

It was the brain dead yes-men that did the killing. All he had to do was say "Go get them".

Do you think these countless armies of henchmen will suddenly become good guys when the leader dies?
Who replaces the leader?

This is certainly not the solution.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Good does not. But I am an evil, sinful man. If I knew this to be true, I would have to believe that God was telling me. Is he telling me for no reason? Is he telling me just so I can kiss my children one more time before I allow them to be killed?

Avoiding death does not require you to stain yourself in blood.

That means you will be a purveyor of death yourself.

This is a contradiction.

One man cannot kill billions. Impossible.
It takes an army of yes-men to accomplish that.

And guess who is going to replace the tyrant you just killed?
Someone even worse.

reply to post by muzzleflash


This is the raw, unaltered truth IMO.

2nd line.

Originally posted by muzzleflash


This is certainly not the solution.

Okay, assuming you read the OP, how would you reconcile the option of doing nothing when the time comes (You are already aware of that outcome) ... How do you deal with that???

Warn people?

Who is going to believe you?

Exposing what you know will make you a target.... Either way, YOU lose.

So, how does one deal with the outcome of doing nothing?

reply to post by muzzleflash
You did not read the OP. Please read the scenario proposed. This many is creating an "army" to kill billions. He is creating a biological weapon that will, according to the proposed scenario, kill most of the population on earth.

You cannot just create a hypothetical and highly unrealistic scenario and expect me to shift my convictions and understanding of good vs evil.

It's a trick question, loaded.

Those who are willing to kill the tyrant are tyrants themselves, by definition.

Tyrants use violence to achieve their goals.

A free person will use liberty to achieve their goals.
Peace and consolation.
Diplomacy and understanding.

This is a battle of principals, not a battle of men.
If your principals can be skewed so easily, ask yourselves how solid were they to begin with?

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Not yet, but any and all posts are appreciated, regardless of "stance"

I really hope this theoretical problem really is theoretical. That it is research for a paper, essay or something of the like.

Having gained knowledge of this theoretical situation in the theoretical manner it was acquired, assuming that I knew both possible outcomes in this theoretical situation, I would venture as far as to assume that I would also know which choice to make.

To my way of thinking the theoretical knowledge would have only been presented to me if I possessed the necessary degree of 'intuition' or 'enlightenment', if you will, to know in my gut what I should do.

What does your gut say?

reply to post by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
If you had advance absolute knowledge before Hitler rose to power, would you have killed him?

You cannot ask that question as posed, the premise is flawed.

You assume Absolute Knowledge in the question, but then frame the options within a very narrow human construct - and Absolute Knowledge by definition cannot be contained within any limiting scope.

How can you be acting on absolute knowledge if you are unsure about the choice of action? To further the distinction, I’ll label what I am referring to as Truth. The knowledge that you are referring to is limited by definition (its a certain time, place, event), and therefore cannot be absolute. There is a far, far greater Truth than what you have described in your thread. And if indeed one was blessed to be in the company of absolute Truth there would be no need for a question to be posed.

I say this to reassure you. It sounds as if you feel very compelled to use the information that you are receiving wisely. I would like to suggest that these experiences are calling out to you to get your attention, but not necessarily to direct you towards preemptive action or inaction. I would say they are much more likely to be calling you inwards. Meditate. If you already meditate occasionally, increase your practice, expand your methods and resources, and find other paths inward.

Your thread mentions that these experiences are growing in intensity, and you are obviously concerned about what to do. In my experience, life experiences, especially noteworthy ones, are there to nudge us towards growth. When the lesson is important but unrealized, those experiences will grow in intensity, or others will occur, in greater emphasis until the path towards the lesson is recognized and embraced. You have already described trying both preemptive action and inaction in your reaction to these experiences, yet they are intensifying. Perhaps they are increasing in intensity because you are being prompted towards a different approach.

I would point out to you that in the very contemplation of the differences between your premise and what I have suggested may be of help. However you move forward, I hope you find the peace you are seeking.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

You did not read the OP. Please read the scenario proposed. This many is creating an "army" to kill billions. He is creating a biological weapon that will, according to the proposed scenario, kill most of the population on earth.

I did 3 times.

There is no acceptable reasoning to become the monster you are trying to stop.

I will not use the method of hypothetical murder to prevent hypothetical murder. Because I will defeat my own purpose by becoming the new murderer. There are far more effective and applicable solutions.

Hell, you could just put the guy in handcuffs. That wasn't hard now was it?

This isn't a , either I die or they die situation.
There are infinite probabilities. Therefore I will not succumb to the simplistic solution of murder to achieve "avoiding murder".

Originally posted by muzzleflash
You cannot just create a hypothetical and highly unrealistic scenario and expect me to shift my convictions and understanding of good vs evil.

It's a trick question, loaded.

Those who are willing to kill the tyrant are tyrants themselves, by definition.

Tyrants use violence to achieve their goals.

A free person will use liberty to achieve their goals.
Peace and consolation.
Diplomacy and understanding.

This is a battle of principals, not a battle of men.
If your principals can be skewed so easily, ask yourselves how solid were they to begin with?

LOL, I freely admit I am still an evil, sinful man. I answered the question asked. Can you not exercise the imagination required to put yourself into a fantasy scenario? It is not real(I hope), but to save the lives of billions from an evil scientist I would exercise the judicious application of violence. Would it be "wrong"? Maybe. I don't know for sure. God has used men, even sinful men, to achieve his plan. This particular scenario would never actually apply to me, but since I have killed for less(usually self defense when you boil it down); why would I not do so to protect my kids. Would you use diplomacy to protect your children from a murderer or a pedophile?