You wake up and....

[nightcrawler13]

have the Dalai Lama attached to you...

it seems that you are the only human being in the country who has the blood type and cell structure to support his life after a car collision...

you are told that you will have to allow him to be connected to your body in hospital for the next nine months or he shall definitely die, if you remain in hospital he will most likely live and recover to a healthy strong state of being.

In what moral context could you allow him to die?

I'm writing an essay on philosophy and ethic, in relation to abortion, and yea, would be nice to hear some other people's views on this?

Edited January 16, 2013 by nightcrawler13

[TheGayTent]

He'd be dead

[t8yman]

yup, he be dead.

a friend, I would do it for - him, no.

[Yoghurt on a Stick]

Yup, he's a goner alright. Tibetan Buddhists are pre-occupied with the relationship between life and death. The Dali Lama knows about life but doesn't actually know about death. What better present could you give him than to allow him to die so that he could see if his theories on death were right. In fact there's a growing school of thought (well, I'm it's solitary member so far) that thinks he should put his money where his mouth is and top himself!

[Rufus Gwertigan]

By removing altruism from the act and replacing it with an obligation your life becomes one of enforced self sacrifice. Essentially the meaning of your life will be to serve others against your will, which in some cultures could be called slavery ;-)

Edited January 16, 2013 by Rufus Gwertigan

[5co77ie]

I'd ask him if he remembers giving me a string of prayer beads - if he doesn't, sod it I lost them anyway, much like the beads he will be forgotten, who will remember him anyway? Dali who??

Edited January 16, 2013 by 5co77ie

[Ed209]

dead.

Friends and family, yes. But as far as I'm concerned, replace the name "Dali Lama" with "stranger", and its exactly the same question.

[strangetown]

Dead. On the basis that I would miss Glasto! easy decision.

[bunique]

What's the link with abortion?

[abdoujaparov]

stupid scenario, because it's completely unrealistic...if you want to explore a moral dilemma, choose a plausible scenario

[Guest]

What's the link with abortion?

[Ed209]

i too wondered what the link to abortion was. couldn't see it at all. Then I thought I was being a bit dumb and not seeing some clever parallel, but now I'm thinking my gut reaction was correct, they're not related in the slightest.

Edited January 16, 2013 by Ed209

[feral chile]

Oh I can see the link to abortion. It might have been better to compare a family member though. Or someone you crashed into at least, so the responsibility of creating a life dependent on you was similar.

[pehaw]

I'd do it for big money. Say a million or so.

[Ed209]

I just don't get the Dali Lama thing at all. Am I supposed to have some emotional attachment to him? Am I supposed to value his life above others?

[nightcrawler13]

stupid scenario, because it's completely unrealistic...if you want to explore a moral dilemma, choose a plausible scenario

Edited January 16, 2013 by nightcrawler13

[nightcrawler13]

I just don't get the Dali Lama thing at all. Am I supposed to have some emotional attachment to him? Am I supposed to value his life above others?

[bunique]

I struggle with the parallel because the abortion discussion involves an enormous debate about at what point life begins, which doesn't exist in this scenario because the life has already begun and been living. And there's no emotional connection there because it's not a life you've created or taken responsibility for. It's a much less straightforward decision than the one you've presented.

So while I may let him live in your scenario, it wouldn't tell you anything about my views on abortion iyswim.

[Ed209]

the person is supposed to be someone who has accomplished something (as an unborn child might do one day) so was the first person I could think of that no one would really have a reason to dislike

[nightcrawler13]

Although, of course, the Dali Lama has achieved much already, while the unborn child's accomplishments are yet to be established or realised. So I still don't really get the parallels.

Maybe this is why I'm a scientist and not a philosopher.

[abdoujaparov]

it's not my scenario, it's a famous philosophical thought experiment that is usually used with a violin player but I thought I'd put someone more up to date who I assumed that people liked, but not as close as a family member...

it seems most people on here are not as nice as i assumed

i for one, as other non-internet people have answered, would answer yes of course and would allow him to stay attached to keep him alive. Yet the counter-argument against abortion is that this life you are taking could one day grow to be a great man/woman and accomplish much in their lives, so why would you not give them the same chance and just put them up for adoption?

was (and still am) curious to hear how some of you answer this?

[t8yman]

its full of holes, because you assume that anyone would put value on some crumbly old mystic from tibet. I couldnt give a fuck about him any more than a guy who lives in the next street who I have never met. I would be nice to him if I met him, but sacrifice the best part of a year to be sat in a bed hooked up to him as a life support machine? No thanks hombre.

You can justify abortion on the grounds that that unborn child could achieve anything with........

The unborn child could also grow up to be Jimmy Saville. An unborn child doesnt become a "child" until a few months into the pregnancy. Its a foetus for a good part of the term (and we all know arguments vary on this one). My own personal belief is that a large majority of the anti abortion lobby come at the argument from a religious perspective, and a religious perspective carries very little water for me.

I remember a few years ago, a friend got his girlfriend pregnant, and between them they decided to opt for an abortion on the grounds that they werent ready to commit to each other - let alone a child. Her mother (I overheard this conversation at a party during the weeks after the pregnancy was discovered) had told her "I told her it was entirely her choice, I would stand beside whatever decision she took. I just needed her to understand that she had to be able to live with herself if she decided to kill the baby". What a fucking bitch.

7 years (or so) later, and yes - they have a lovely little boy. But I have never seen a more miserable couple in all my life. I'm sure this happens every day in this country, what a waste. In fact - if you want to look at "wasting a potential life", look at the 2 potential lives that having a baby destroyed. 2 people who could have achieved much much more in their lives, instead condemned to a life with a partner they wouldnt have chosen otherwise, in a life of relative poverty over what they may have achieved had they been able to finish college etc......

[abdoujaparov]

its full of holes, because you assume that anyone would put value on some crumbly old mystic from tibet. I couldnt give a fuck about him any more than a guy who lives in the next street who I have never met. I would be nice to him if I met him, but sacrifice the best part of a year to be sat in a bed hooked up to him as a life support machine? No thanks hombre.

[t8yman]

I guess the question hasn't really got anything to do with the dalai lama - putting the identity of the other person to one side, the question is about the extent to which you value the life of another. Will you allow someone to die knowing that you - and only you - could save them. Allowing someone to die just because one would rather not be inconvenienced for a few months might be seen as a little bit callous.

If I could save another life, in principle I would. My difficulty with this scenario is that its specifics are impossible so, as I said before, saying yes is meaningless. But the anwser to the question behind it - would I save a life if I (and only I) could is yes.

Does this principle extend to abortion? Well, no I dont think it does. The moral considerations are different.

[jump]

it's not my scenario, it's a famous philosophical thought experiment that is usually used with a violin player but I thought I'd put someone more up to date who I assumed that people liked, but not as close as a family member...