Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
...The question is, is it ethical to kill someone to protect property? And if you believe the value of life is greater than the value of property, then no, it is not...
|
"Life" by itself has no universally-determined or universally-agreed value. The deviation of this value would be extremely broad, because it exists only empirically; thus, subjective and impossible to prove objectively. You and GGG argue that ANY life has the same value, which supersedes the value of ANY property. I argue that this position is nonsensical, unsupportable and self-aggrandizing. Value of bomber's life plummets to zero at the moment he points that grenade at someone's house. (I could bring the argument of your little sister playing in the backyard, like you did, but we are trying to keep it civil, right?). What the bomber might do after he is released from prison for good behaviour is irrelevant. It could be disenchanted teenager, an anarchist, a religious fanatic, a cheated husband, a mentally deranged drug addict or a serial killer - also irrelevant. At that moment, property owner's decision to react is made in milli-seconds and is acceptable/understandable, whatever it is. Ethics has no time to enter the decision-making process. Nor it should.