It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


hypothetical ethical question

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 09:57 PM
Whoops. Meant to hit edit and I hit quote.

[edit on 8/26/2010 by SaulGoodman]

posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 11:02 PM
reply to post by SaulGoodman

we will make this even simpler.

The Aliens have had a breakthrough and that only 1 person is required every week for the life of the plant.
the plant lasts 10 years, but the second plant requires 2 people a week and that plant lasts 20 years, 3rd plat requires 3 ppl and lasts 30 years etc,....

as we had just had a magic breakthrough, 360 plants are required to supply all the power we require.

Still the aliens are confused as to why we are kicking up a fuss and our reluctance.

They agree that the accident scenario is one they can live with and that that accidents happen and it is not a choice.

What they do say is that when we have this free energy to give you

free power which now means that no more mining accidents
the planets health increases and also lowers the probability of wars over raw matarials used to produce power thus reducing another death rate.

posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 11:46 PM
Fair enough.

I'd say no, even with these breakthroughs. It would create as much if not more conflict than it'll get rid of. There'll be a lot of conflict over who gets which plant. Everyone will want the first plant: 52 people a year, ten year commitment, not that bad all things considered. On the flip side, no one is going to want to have the 360th plant. That's a lot of people sent to their death every week for, if I'm doing the math right, 3,600 years. Three and a half millenia and if they stop feeding the plant, everyone's screwed.

So, you'd have conflict over the order. Also, eventually the areas that have a higher number of plants are going to get disgruntled. They'll ask, "Why are we pulling so much of the weight?" The most logical solution to their frustration is to go to war to capture slaves. Even though the goal for one side is to capture people alive, both sides are going to end up killing.

The second most logical solution would be to raise people en masse specifically so they could be sent to the plant. Two problems there. One, it'll make a lot of people angry, especially considering the smartest way to go about it would be to not educate them, never show them any emotional attention, give them only the bare bones for food and health care and, probably, hobble or cripple them in some way so they can't run away. Second, even with the poorest of care, it'll take a lot of money to raise them to whatever the acceptable age is.

Thinking about it, these break throughs are probably worse than the original scenario.

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 01:01 AM
reply to post by SaulGoodman

actually meant that the first 360 plants have a 10 year life opposed to the 360 all having a different rate.
all 360 original plants last for 10 years with the requirement of 1 person per week.

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 01:15 AM
Actually this sounds like a perfect solution for death row inmates.

But that's my take on it. So sure, wouldn't have a problem.

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 05:31 AM
reply to post by munkey66

I would still have to say no, deliberate murder is unacceptable period

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 07:34 AM
reply to post by davespanners

but the initial use would only have volenteers willing to help the planet and those people wanting to end it

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 09:20 AM
I am all for it if we use the murderers, child molesters, rapists and the corrupt and murderous/treasonous politicians across the world.

In reality if this were ever to be true it would only hurt the innocent cause you know somebody somewhere would use it for evil.

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 07:17 PM
reply to post by mblahnikluver

but could you see a time where crime starts to become a thing of the past as there is free energy everywhere.

what happens when the criminals run out?

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 07:33 PM
I don't personally find deliberate murder acceptable even if it is sanctioned by the sate in the form of the death penalty.

As for suicidal volunteers, I guess I couldn't think of any moral objection to that.

The world health organization estimates that approximately a million people a year commit suicide worldwide, someone better at maths then me would have to work out if thats enough to keep the machines powered. It would also mean moving suicidal people about as some countries have a near 0 suicide rate.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in