Of course I'd kill a puppy for $1,000,000
I'd kill a puppy for $1,000
Think of all the human lives that could be saved with $1,000,000
Estimates say that it costs somewhere between $200 and $2,000 to save a human life
That's between 5000 and 50,000 lives that you're sacrificing by being too cowardly to kill a puppy
You monsters
I have no idea what any of this means...No. If Rick couldn't cut off Coral's arm, then no I'm not killing a puppy.
I think this might be a reference to The Walking DeadI have no idea what any of this means...
Yasss! Poor, Rick.I think this might be a reference to The Walking Dead
I'm sorry that the poor pup must go.Would you? And do you think it's right to do?
This question is asked in every forum, might as well put it in this one too.
A cute adorable and nice little puppy.
You could kill it and get $1000000.
You could only use that money for yourself (or friends and stuff). What I mean is that you can't kill the puppy and give all the money to a foundation to save puppies or something. You could only buy yourself a iPod and go with your friends in a trip, ect.
Would you? And do you think it's right to do?
Probably the most well written response I've seen here.I do not like the kind of reasoning that produced these premises, but I cannot help feeling kind of in awe at its immoral genius: if the question had « only » been about killing a puppy for 1M, one might have resorted to utilitarian ethics to justify the crime. But the devilish clause is added that “you may not spend any of the money for charitable causes”, which is a way of bereaving the responder of any recourse to utilitarian ethics either. As for virtue ethics, needless to say that the killing of innocent puppies would rather seem to point the way towards the cultivation of vice, not virtue.
In sum, any person who pretends to subscribe to any kind of moral system or framework would have to reply “no, I would not kill the puppy”. It seems to me that the premises make every single form of moral framework unavailable, bar egotistic immorality. I personally would answer that no, I would not kill the puppy, because I am at least willing to be judged by the yardstick of a moral law if I fail at not killing it when faced with the temptation. May the puppy will survive!