Thought experiment help?
 

So this is something new I'm trying, just for my curiosity and due to my interest in psychoanalysis and I've always been more in to philosophy than religion. I did my first one yesterday on FB and I used the meme where it asks: Would you stomp on the puppy for 18 BILLION DOLLARS.

But I changed it up to be more morally thought provoking. So I asked, for every 1$ let's say the saves an animals life. So that's 18 Billion animals you could save, endangered species could be saved from going extinct ect. So, would you kill the puppy in order to help the 18 Billion animals?

Well here's the results.

NO: 11 total. 6 females and 5 males (didn't cover demographics or any of that just men/women.

YES:4 Total. 3 females and 1 Male.

I had spent a lot of time drawing a conclusion from this and it's supposed to make you question your morals. Does the end justify the means?
How about any of you guys, what would you answer? And you have think about it carefully.

(So I want to continue this trend for my own intellectual reasons and curiosity and would like some help with more Thought Experiment ideas. Yes I checked Google and read some to give me some more ideas but I want to hear more original ideas. Anyone care to help or at least answer the question I posted?) I'll post my short summary conclusion (kept it short due to not enough participants and kept it vague for a reason.)

i would eat a puppy while its alive with my hands and teeth for 18 billion dollars is this a serious question?

Yes it is. And yes I had plenty of trolls say yes (I troll myself as well) but was asking for legitimate yes or no.

But as I said I changed it from it being about the 18 Billion dollars to each dollar would go to save an animals life. If you want to keep it like the original question and just keep the money idc do as u please.

im not trolling in the least bit. i would stomp a puppy for 18 billion dollars, and thats not even a difficult question, and im someone who loves dogs. im one of those weirdos that would rather see a human hurt than a dog.

i wouldn't stomp a puppy to give 18 billion dollars to puppy welfare though, like if it just miraculously helped puppies if i stomped one to death.

but yea your experiment is flawed because its facebook where people don't want to look like terrible people to people who know them.

So you've rewritten the trolley lever thought experiment?

Agreed I like dogs but would massacre a litter of newborn puppies for that kind of cash

Is this a serious thread?

Someone watches The Good Place.

I feel my former thread about punching blind children n shit was a bit better then this ngl, and that was just a meme.

I’d fucking clobber that puppy, no joke. Animals besides us are under our control for a reason. We’re top dogs on this earth, unlike all those other pussies, including the actual pussies.

But if the destruction of those animals, all 18 million, effect the environment in ways that negatively effect humans in the future, I’d have to rethink.

This is how rich people feel about poor people.

Demonstrate this is objectively wrong

if it's not objectively wrong then neither is the perspective of the rich people in his statement and that's part of the point so hopefully you get it now

also this was a terrible social experiment

No lie my better half loves that show. I remember hearing about it in high school though. It didn't come from that though, right?

It’s a quality show.

But yea, pretty classic ethical thought experiment.

Agreed. We haven't seen the new season yet but I'm worried it might get too convoluted for me to want to follow

What?

I disagree. Why is it terrible? From what I seen you all have to reevaluate your moral compass cause if you believe a life is worth less than money which is a physical substance mankinf made then you are severely lacking in the compassion and empathetic department and should probably seek help.

And yea I chose the money as well but I would have to use at least Some of it for a good cause. Like create no profit organization for rescuing animals and for people in need. But I guess I'm just weird. Or actually have a soul, can't tell with the lot of fucked up individuals in here.

But it’s not a human life. Give me evidence none humans matter at all.

Lol thanks. Was hoping wouldnt have to scroll too far for this to be said.

Op open a book guy

Ud be amazed at the ideas people have already had

Dogs are used for all kinds of reasons, like security dogs, dogs that assist the blind and other people with handicaps and even mental instability. Fact, I was in the hospital for pancreatitis, and they actually had a hospital dog they bring around to paitents because it is known that petting an animal, is similar to hugging a grieving person, it's an analgesic. So if everything I mentioned about dogs which wasn't even a lot holds no substance at all then feel free to explain why. I don't know if I believe animals have souls, that's a different topic. But what is wrong with animals? They act upon instinct not by an ego, or motive like.mankind does. Animals aren't evil, yea we can domestic them, beat and abuse them, but they can feel pain. A dog is happy to see his owner when they get home for example. What makes that life less valueable as let's say, having an abortion, because it's "just a dumb animal"?

dms speciesist as hell but can't comprehend classism

I assume you meant Elp? But yes I read books, quite interesting. I was only trying to put something in to my own laymen ways instead of using other classical thought experiments instead. Was no attempt at rewriting anything, merely experimenting with thinking about different types of thought experiment scenarios.

I'll slaughter any pussy for free...

nah man, its just the framing of the question blows, which is why you had to change it. what you changed it to is terribly vague as well. 18 billion dollars worth of saving animals. what animals? how are they saved? is it going to conservation of the forest or some shit? or going to shelters? etc. either way the moral impact of murdering a puppy PERSONALLY wouldn't outweigh some non personal saving of animals in general

with 18 billion dollars given to you though, and not some intangible blanket statement of saving animals, it would be so easy to get over killing a puppy though, because i think you aren't grasping how much money that is. you could personally do so much good and still be filthy rich on top of all of it

plus animals die every day b. you could rationalize anything while being able to literally afford to do ANYTHING. id stomp a baby out too, if in the hypothetical land it wouldn't be murder/i wouldnt be punished for it. its nothing against an animal in general. life is cheap. its a cold world doggie

Lmaooo

Idk how much simpler the trolley lever thing could get tbh. Instead of kill one to save a handful of people, you're killing one to save 18 billion dogs. There's like 5 active trolley routes in my region but it's a lot easier to wrap my head around than your scenario... Am I out of touch?

On my Bob Barker shit I'm about to say no anyway. 18 billion dogs is too much to a point where so many would starve/go feral/fight for resources from other animals (pushing them to extinction etc)

That was exactly my point was to be vague b.c thought experiments are blown out of proportion, and exaggerated themes that don't occur in reality but simply make you question yourself. I could have wrote a novel about "The Mystery of the Man who Stomped the puppy to death in the streets in order to save 18 billion animals" and would have the premise of the movie like Men in Black where a shadow government goes around asking people to do it, not different to that movie THE BOX which was basically put in to a more realistic based scenario, i wanted it to be exaggerated.

This was also my point, you guys are over looking what I said at face value. I said think about the consequences (do we really NEED to save 18 billion animals" because of over population and the inflation increases daily and the ratio to that of humans is like 7.6 billion people on this planet. So that was stated like that to be a stupid sounding question in that regard.

Bro

the word consequences does not appear in here once. You just said we could save 18 billion animals with that money. It's the trolley lever thing's gritty 2018 reboot

OP could you run a test on how many people actually pray for strangers on FB that they say they will pray for in comment threads?

we have literally been studying ethics and morality for hundreds of years

u think ur going to just conjure an original idea on the discussion in ur stupid little peanut brain when u cant even understand that the devil is the antagonist in the Bible?

fuck u an fuck fb

You’re the piece of shit that ignores when it mean satan wins

Fuck U sir

Lol and it's funny you believe in the Bible Ghost but I don't condemn you for it. You obviously have some anger issues pal. Not to mention that Lucifer is the bad guy but Luciferinans debate that subject so that clearly when over your egotistical sized water melon looking ass head fucking idiot. If you're going to paraphrase my comment get it right u fuck wit.

Actually I just might try that. Why not, isn't hurting my life any.

I don’t know what either of those mean, ngl, but I bet one of which has to do with something not grounded in fundamental reality.

yea ur right

try this

got a brand new idea for u

attach 18billion dogs to a machine that can send pulses of electric shocks thru the push of a button//////

then tell the participant to shock the dogs...... low voltages at first.....just little static jolts.....but then make them increase voltage

now destroy the American flag......neatly....with no one available to see you perform the act....by cutting it into small pieces with scissors and placing it into a box

you can save the doctor...the nun...or the farmer with your raft

how many children will you buy subway tickets for?


REALLY EXCITED TO SEE RESULTS OF THIS HIGHLY ORIGINAL AND UNIQUE THOUGHT EXPERIMENT