Question of today

If someone told you they needed to murder someone in order to teach you that murder was wrong, what would you say or do in response?

I’m genuinely asking this question. I would love to hear your true responses.

50 thoughts on “Question of today

    1. As in… if someone were mentally unstable they couldn’t be considered someone who knew what they were doing? If that were the case, they likely wouldn’t be teaching others murder was wrong, would they?

      Liked by 1 person

    1. If the concept stayed the same, but the subject changed, would your answer stay the same? Say… taking the murder out of it. If someone said they needed to chop off their leg to prove to prove that people with all four limbs have more advantages in life than those who don’t… similar concept, completely different situation. What do you say?

      I’m asking not because I’m testing you but because I genuinely follow your train of thought and I want to see if you follow mine if I change the subject matter but the concept stays the same.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Certain morals are innate and accepted as so because it keeps order in society. Context matters. Chopping off a leg is unnecessary since people are born with two legs for normal function, having one less is a disability. If everyone has two hands and two feet and society is made to accommodate that, anything less is in hinderance. We don’t need to chop one off to know that.

        Liked by 2 people

  1. We innately know what is right and what is wrong. It’s built into us as humans. That can be skewed by society, family, culture, TV, etc. So I would probably point out that I feel that each life is precious so I would think taking that away would be wrong and would not have to see a murder take place to learn that lesson.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Is this a hypothetical where they think I don’t look upon murder as wrong, as in, “You’re going to think murder is OK until it actually hits home! I’d have to actually murder someone for you to change your position on moral relativity!” Or is it that they are actually going to go murder someone, because they think that’s a good way to ensure I learn a morality lesson?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I would suggest it’s because they think it’s a good way to ensure you learn a morality lesson. In the subject I’m drawing comparisons too, 95% of the human race knows it’s wrong, but someone is still feeling the need to make an example anyway.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Interesting — because of the 5% that doesn’t know it’s wrong? Like, they won’t be satisfied until it’s at 100%, and they think the solution is actually committing the wrongful act so the 5% is faced with the tragedy of it?

        Liked by 2 people

      2. I wonder if that’s what people are trying to advocate for, committing the act so that the remaining 5% can understand by seeing. When in reality, the remaining 5% are likely the individuals who are mentally unstable, or have some sort of condition that clouds their judgement or ability to understand.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Right. I suspect it comes from a theory that abstract thinking won’t result in the same level of morality. That for some people, some things have to be experienced to be understood and part of a person’s core. Then there’s the part of the population that actually doesn’t think murder is wrong, but that’s another topic.

        Like

  3. If I don’t already know that murder is wrong, teaching me that lesson by committing the act, I would think, is more likely to show me that exceptions can be made. Like, if I’m on the fence about murder and you kill someone, then it must be okay.

    For the record, I am aware that murder is definitely wrong.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Well, I can’t imagine someone saying that to me, but just in case, hypothetically speaking, my immediate response would be a laughter. And if this person was still rather serious, I wouldn’t waste time in making it clear how unruly ideas are not welcome in my world. I don’t have to consume poison or make someone else consume it to confirm if it’s poisonous.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Okay, so there’s a very similar situation polarizing the internet right now. I just changed the crime from what crime people are speaking about to murder, to see if it would change the majority’s answer. And… it did. But, the actual situation sweeping the internet is to do a much more ‘mainstream’ crime, but still, a crime no less. Your response makes a lot of sense and I wholly agree.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. I can’t think of any situation in which actually committing murder would help someone to understand that it’s wrong. Most people just know that and if they don’t I’m pretty sure that killing someone isn’t going to teach them the lesson we’d want them to learn.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I guess people do view some crimes as worse than others which is why they have different penalties in law? I don’t know what crime you’re referring to so I don’t know if my answer would be any different but I can’t imagine that a way to teach that something is wrong would be by doing it. That does seem odd.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s