Thomson’s Violin:
One day, you wake up in hospital. In the nearby bed lies a world famous violinist who is connected to you with various tubes and machines.
To your horror, you discover that you have been kidnapped by the Music Appreciation Society. Aware of the maestro’s impending death, they hooked you up to the violinist.
If you stay in the hospital bed, connected to the violinist, he will be totally cured in nine months. You are unlikely to suffer harm. No one else can save him. Do you have an obligation to stay connected?
One must think: what would they want others to do for them. If one stays connected to the violinist, then he is saving a life, no matter who it is. If that same person is in the similiar situation, one would want another to sacrifice 9 months to save them. Famous person or not, human life is very important, as social status does not dictate the value of a life.
Had this been a person I admired, I would be less hesitant to give up my nine months, yet I still would give up the time for other people.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree, this is a lot like what I said. It shouldn't matter who the person is. Saving someone is saving someone, and it's not like we'd be dying from helping this person. It is just a boring nine months in a hospital bed.
I like how clear and to the point your entry was. Maybe, though, you should include some "evidence", like proof for what you believe.
I'm sure you would save this person, but I don't know if any of us really value human life. When was the last time you(or me) went out of your way to find a life and save it. Do you have to be slapped in the face with the pain or possible death of others before it becomes a moral responsibility to help.
Post a Comment