Let a thousand guilty men go to save 1 innocent person

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pengwuino
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a hypothetical moral dilemma involving the choice between convicting an innocent man or releasing 1,000 guilty individuals. Participants explore the implications of their decisions on justice, morality, and societal safety, engaging in a debate that touches on philosophical and ethical considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that they would prefer to convict the innocent man to keep the 1,000 guilty individuals incarcerated, citing concerns about public safety.
  • Others contend that the rights of the innocent should prevail, suggesting that the innocent man should be found not guilty regardless of the consequences for the guilty individuals.
  • A few participants challenge the premise of the hypothetical situation, questioning the logic and morality of the choices presented.
  • Some express that the situation reflects broader themes of individual rights versus societal safety, debating the value of one life against many.
  • Several participants express discomfort with the idea of sending an innocent person to jail, regardless of the number of guilty individuals involved.
  • There are conflicting views on whether the hypothetical scenario is meaningful or nonsensical, with some participants emphasizing the need for practical justice considerations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views remain regarding the moral implications of the choices and the validity of the hypothetical scenario itself.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight the lack of clarity in the hypothetical situation and its implications for real-world justice systems, noting that the scenario does not reflect practical legal principles.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring ethical dilemmas, moral philosophy, and the complexities of justice in society.

Would you find him guilty or not-guilty

  • He would be found guilty, the 1,000 felons will stay locked up

    Votes: 13 59.1%

  • He will be found not-guilty, the 1,000 felons will be released into the public

    Votes: 7 31.8%

  • Other (chickening out eh?)

    Votes: 2 9.1%
  • Total voters
    22
  • #31
i seriosuly don't see what's really hard about the decision (perhaps this is only IMO). if you let go 1,000 criminals, they would kill even MORE innocent people.
rephrase: would you rather have more than 1 innocent person die or just 1 innocent person go to jail?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
If it is just 1:1, then it would change the dynamics of it. That murderer may not neccessarily kill again. So most people would save the innocent man.
 
  • #33
WhiteWolf said:
lol, well, no offense, but I don't buy that. Because everytime someone steals something, they plan it to where they don't get caught for a reason.
That's kind of what they're saying. When you want to commit a crime you try to find a way not to get caught, instead of just giving up and not doing it.
 
  • #34
And the government is their deterent. That is why I don't buy that it is proven that the government is not an effective deterant. The government makes the laws and the punishment, thus, the government stops people from stealing and such.
 
  • #35
I think that smurf's claim does have the most validity of the commission of particularly violent crimes, like murder. I'm not sure what kind of statistics are out there on this, but from what I've heard, these are usually crimes of passion. Deterrence doesn't work to prevent a crime of passion; it only works to prevent well thought-out, clearly premeditated crimes.* Since these are the crimes that the death penalty is being doled out for, deterrence probably isn't having much of an effect. Of course, don't take my word for it without statistical backing. Maybe smurf can provide us with some of this, since it's his claim.

*I don't mean premeditation in the legal sense. The barrier for charging murder one is painfully low. You only have to have a minute of thought that you want to kill someone, and it can happen directly before actually doing it. I think this still qualifies as a crime of passion in the relevant sense, even if legally it is considered premeditation.
 
  • #36
Murder perhaps, but this question didnt really specify murder, did it? I forget, I just thought it was just some serious crime. Since it was hypothetical, I didnt consider passion or not, but practically, I believe you are correct.
 

Similar threads

  • Poll Poll
News Parliament member gets arrested for autistic behaviors
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Here's an idea: let people "work off" their criminal records
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
7K
News Is War Sometimes Necessary to Achieve Peace?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
News Dangerous Dick: Reasons to Fear the Runningmate of President Flop-Flop
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Which Chooses Fate: The Lady or the Tiger?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
7K
News Is the American Consul General in Jerusalem truly helping American citizens?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
News Patriot Act 2: Summarized by Alex Jones
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
At a crossroads (drop out? chase a dream? time out?)
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
Why is the U-2 nicknamed the Dragon Lady?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
9K