| | I deny the validity of "lifeboat" problems. Ayn Rand tried to write around the problem by complaining that liberals put people in lifeboats and that normal life is not being in a lifeboat. Actually, normal life is being in a lifeboat.
Every minute of every day is a life and death crisis. That is what makes morality, is it not? Using free will, we act according to our values to achieve that which we seek to gain and/or keep. An indestructible robot would be amoral by definition.
A so-called lifeboat is just a more stark moment, hugely different in quantity perhaps but not in quality from so-called everyday life.
What would you do if you were on a lifeboat and ...?
You mean, like if I were on a city bus and I were late for an appointment, would I have the right to commandeer the bus, or would the people have the right to vote that I must miss my stop so that the majority of them could make theirs?
That is the reductio ad absurdem of lifeboat problems.
How much of an emergency is enough of an "emergency" to override the rules of objective (i.e., Objectivist) morality?
(The free market is fine as long as it works fairly, but the government must step in when economic entities become too powerful. Normally, we are in favor of competition, but too much competition, or not enough of it, are alike temporary economic lifeboats, and under those circumstances, normal recognition of rights must be abrogated.)
(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 7/11, 6:39pm)
|
|
