Great news about dying

[kiwi_2005]

This was put into practice by the Nazi doctor Josef Mengele (angel of death) during ww2 on mainly Polish & Jew prisoners. During his crusade of creating the master race & perfect twins he experimented on thousands with the ice technique, of course not like now, he had no regards for human life.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by kiwi_2005

This was put into practice by the Nazi doctor Josef Mengele (angel of death) during ww2 on mainly Polish & Jew prisoners. During his crusade of creating the master race & perfect twins he experimented on thousands with the ice technique, of course not like now, he had no regards for human life.

I know you didn't mean it that way but please don't compare Mengele and this.

These doctors are bringing back people to their families, who are ever so appreciative.

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

Wait, what?

Did you just wake up from a saline slushy?

[P_Funk]

Heh, Death be not Proud.

Though I don't think this is exactly what he envisioned.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by kiwi_2005

This was put into practice by the Nazi doctor Josef Mengele (angel of death) during ww2 on mainly Polish & Jew prisoners. During his crusade of creating the master race & perfect twins he experimented on thousands with the ice technique, of course not like now, he had no regards for human life.

Josef Mengele and other forced human experimenters pose a interesting philosophical
problem.
There are some (J.Mengele not included) whose barbarous acts are likely to have
saved more lives then where used in the experiments. Clearly there is no moral
justification from this fact and that can lead us to the conclusion that:

"No price is too great to pay and no brutality too horrible to inflict if it can be justified
that the good will be so much more than the evil needed to impose it."
Is a poor moral standpoint.

However, this throws in to question countless contemporary and historical cases
where horrible brutalities have been inflicted upon people with the justification that
the good coming from the act will be greater than the evil.

-see: Hiroshima

[kurtz]

Originally Posted by Letum

Josef Mengele and other forced human experimenters pose a interesting philosophical
problem.
There are some (J.Mengele not included) whose barbarous acts are likely to have
saved more lives then where used in the experiments. Clearly there is no moral
justification from this fact and that can lead us to the conclusion that:

"No price is too great to pay and no brutality too horrible to inflict if it can be justified
that the good will be so much more than the evil needed to impose it."
Is a poor moral standpoint.

However, this throws in to question countless contemporary and historical cases
where horrible brutalities have been inflicted upon people with the justification that
the good coming from the act will be greater than the evil.

-see: Hiroshima

Yes I was somewhat exercised by this. As I understand it the results of Nazi research were destroyed. I know it's a difficult and sensitive issue but I feel that made all the victims suffering in vain.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by kurtz

Yes I was somewhat exercised by this. As I understand it the results of Nazi research were destroyed. I know it's a difficult and sensitive issue but I feel that made all the victims suffering in vain.

Most of the recherche papers for most Nazi experiments where destroyed or lost, but
not all. However most of the practical lessons learned where put into use in the
German armed forces immediately; most notably techniques for reviving hypothermia,
which proved to be effective for quite some time after the war until theoretical biology
caught up and improved upon them.

That said, most was totally useless because of the fascination with race and the false
belief that the victim's bodies would behave very differently from bodies of "pure race".

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Letum

-see: Hiroshima

Unbelievable moral equivalency rubbish.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Unbelievable moral equivalency rubbish.

You must see the relation in terms of:
"No price is too great to pay and no brutality too horrible to inflict if it can be justified
that the good will be so much more than the evil needed to impose it.".

That is usualy the main justification for Hiroshima. No?

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Letum

You must see the relation in terms of:
"No price is too great to pay and no brutality too horrible to inflict if it can be justified
that the good will be so much more than the evil needed to impose it.".

That is usualy the main justification for Hiroshima. No?

No. According to you, one is forced to assume that use of the bombs then was evil in some way.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

No. According to you, one is forced to assume that use of the bombs then was evil in some way.

I'm not saying that bombs are evil, I'm just questioning the status-quo that a bomb, or
any other brutality can be justified by the greater good it will achieve.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Letum

I'm not saying that bombs are evil, I'm just questioning the status-quo that a bomb, or
any other brutality can be justified by the greater good it will achieve.

I understood you clearly. To which I repeat:

Unbelievable moral equivalency rubbish.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

I understood you clearly. To which I repeat:

Unbelievable moral equivalency rubbish.

Are you skirting the issue by rubbishing it or do you think that the ends is always a justification for the means?

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Letum

Are you skirting the issue by rubbishing it or do you think that the ends is always a justification for the means?

On the contrary! Ends don't justify means should be almost an ironclad rule. There was nothing wrong or evil in the means used by the US in dropping the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That's exactly the point!

[Letum]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

On the contrary! Ends don't justify means should be almost an ironclad rule. There was nothing wrong or evil in the means used by the US in dropping the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That's exactly the point!

:hmm: So it was a justification in it's self?
I don't understand?

Isn't the only reason for a action to achive something other than the action it's self?

[STEED]

Pass me the popcorn and that can of beer, we got a hot thread here people.