Knyght wrote:
In the same way that maliciously murdering 6 strangers is more wrong than murdering the murderer.
this isn't really murder though <.<... i know there's degrees of things irl, but i was keeping it within the context of the question/'riddle'. but if you're gonna go there may as well consider the point that 6 strangers could all be 6 murderers or 6 terminally ill people in a lot of pain or 6 other sorts of malcontents that would warrant the death penalty or some combination. after all, if they're strangers you don't really know, though the overall chances would be pretty low. on top of this, killing someone isn't 'wrong' when it's done in self-defense or i'd even say in protection of someone weaker (a mom killing someone meaning to cause harm to her child). these are all extenuating circumstances tho <.<...........
i'm just talking about a lion, a monkey, a giraffe, and a squirrel, which is sort of a question without moral obligation. so unless the point is that saying 2+2=5 is more wrong than 2+2=15, which are technically equally wrong as is any real number not equal to 4, then it just doesn't make sense. and even if that is the point, what exactly is the standard basis for the tiered 'correctiveness' of said answers <.<....? idungetit.........
i got teh riddle tho. good1
Login
FAQ
Search
