Of police and serial murderers (morality)

[1137]

The local police force has given a man a job of becoming a serial murderer. This may seem counter productive, but it certainly works out for the good guys. You see, the police give their serial murderer a list of individual to stalk threaten, and kill if necessary. It's a manufactured problem the police have full control over.

Next, after some killings become public, police start going to families and individuals on the kill list and giving them an ultimatum. Give full support (and donations) to the police force or be abducted, tortured, and killed by the serial murderer.

On one hand, the police force has great income and can do more good works. The harm the murderer is capable of is nothing in comparison to what the police can now do. Have the police acted immorally?

 

[NulliuSINverba]

The local police force has given a man a job of becoming a serial murderer. This may seem counter productive, but it certainly works out for the good guys.

You're arguing that aiding and abetting a serial murderer is something that "good guys" engage in? How utterly reprehensible.

You see, the police give their serial murderer a list of individual to stalk threaten, and kill if necessary. It's a manufactured problem the police have full control over.

Then he isn't a serial killer ... he's simply a hit man on the police payroll.

This isn't even really interesting as a thought experiment. It seems like someone has been huffing too much Conspiracy Theory.

Next, after some killings become public, police start going to families and individuals on the kill list and giving them an ultimatum. Give full support (and donations) to the police force or be abducted, tortured, and killed by the serial murderer.

This is typically called "extortion" and it's a crime.

On one hand, the police force has great income and can do more good works.

Good works? Such as hiring serial killers and engaging in extortion?

The harm the murderer is capable of is nothing in comparison to what the police can now do.

They could have done all of the illegal acts you've described without having to hire a serial killer.

Have the police acted immorally?

Can you possibly be serious?

...

BOOOOOOOO! Come up with something better, please.

 

[1137]

You're arguing that aiding and abetting a serial murderer is something that "good guys" engage in? How utterly reprehensible.



Then he isn't a serial killer ... he's simply a hit man on the police payroll.

This isn't even really interesting as a thought experiment. It seems like someone has been huffing too much Conspiracy Theory.



This is typically called "extortion" and it's a crime.



Good works? Such as hiring serial killers and engaging in extortion?



They could have done all of the illegal acts you've described without having to hire a serial killer.



Can you possibly be serious?

...

BOOOOOOOO! Come up with something better, please.

I agree, and considering the Christian god acts identically at the fall of man, I believe his actions are reprehensible as well.

 

[McBell]

I agree, and considering the Christian god acts identically at the fall of man, I believe his actions are reprehensible as well.

Gonna have to spell that one out....

 

[Baladas]

Yes, they would have behaved immorally.
So much so that they should be sentenced as harshly as possible.

 

[LuisDantas]

The local police force has given a man a job of becoming a serial murderer. This may seem counter productive, but it certainly works out for the good guys. You see, the police give their serial murderer a list of individual to stalk threaten, and kill if necessary. It's a manufactured problem the police have full control over.

Next, after some killings become public, police start going to families and individuals on the kill list and giving them an ultimatum. Give full support (and donations) to the police force or be abducted, tortured, and killed by the serial murderer.

On one hand, the police force has great income and can do more good works. The harm the murderer is capable of is nothing in comparison to what the police can now do. Have the police acted immorally?

Of course. I'm honestly not sure why you even ask.

 

[psychoslice]

What's the point to the question ??.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

The local police force has given a man a job of becoming a serial murderer. This may seem counter productive, but it certainly works out for the good guys. You see, the police give their serial murderer a list of individual to stalk threaten, and kill if necessary. It's a manufactured problem the police have full control over.

Next, after some killings become public, police start going to families and individuals on the kill list and giving them an ultimatum. Give full support (and donations) to the police force or be abducted, tortured, and killed by the serial murderer.

On one hand, the police force has great income and can do more good works. The harm the murderer is capable of is nothing in comparison to what the police can now do. Have the police acted immorally?

We don't have to devise hypothetical scenarios to discuss this. We can look at the great amount of knowledge we have learned about human biology through the acts of the SS and Unit 721 of WW2. We can move on to the "monster experiment" of the United States to further understand stuttering. There are plentiful examples.

By causing incredible suffering and causing the gruesome deaths of helpless human beings, we gained a mass of knowledge about human physiology and psychology which, though it pains us to admit, furthered medicine and science.

Did Dr. Wendell Johnson, Unit 721 and the SS act morally by torturing others to better understand human physiology that we may further medicine, medicine and psychology?

Of course not.

Doing the wrong thing for the right reasons still makes you wrong.

 

[1137]

The point is the scenario is a metaphor for the fall of man, with God as the police and the killer as the serpent/devil.

 

[psychoslice]

The point is the scenario is a metaphor for the fall of man, with God as the police and the killer as the serpent/devil.

Who said the killer is the serpent, I see it the other way around.

 

[Nakosis]

I'm pretty much a moral nihilist. The only basis of morals are our feelings. How individuals feel about an action differs so their moralities differs.

Assuming a God, God's morals would be determine by what God feels is right and wrong which likely has little to do which what you or I feel is right or wrong.

Assuming an omnipotent God, God could make it so the murder never existed or the people that were harmed never existed. God could torture you in life make that all disappear and place you in Heaven and you'd have no memory of anything but your wonderful life in heaven.

You can't really ascribe morals to an all-powerful being because anything done could be undone.

Man on the other hand can't undo anything so we are stuck with our actions.

 

[McBell]

The point is the scenario is a metaphor for the fall of man, with God as the police and the killer as the serpent/devil.

Not a very good metaphor.
Perhaps you should brush up on genesis a bit more, think your "metaphor" through a bit more, then try it again?

 

[1137]

Not a very good metaphor.
Perhaps you should brush up on genesis a bit more, think your "metaphor" through a bit more, then try it again?

The only change necessary would be for the police not to hire a serial killer. Mere awareness of the killer along with extorted protection describes the story better. Besides that they're identical.

 

[McBell]

The only change necessary would be for the police not to hire a serial killer. Mere awareness of the killer along with extorted protection describes the story better. Besides that they're identical.

If you refuse to accept the fact that your "metaphor" is severely lacking, then there is nothing more to do but let you destroy your credibility.

Have a nice day.

 

[gsa]

The local police force has given a man a job of becoming a serial murderer. This may seem counter productive, but it certainly works out for the good guys. You see, the police give their serial murderer a list of individual to stalk threaten, and kill if necessary. It's a manufactured problem the police have full control over.

Next, after some killings become public, police start going to families and individuals on the kill list and giving them an ultimatum. Give full support (and donations) to the police force or be abducted, tortured, and killed by the serial murderer.

On one hand, the police force has great income and can do more good works. The harm the murderer is capable of is nothing in comparison to what the police can now do. Have the police acted immorally?

I saw what you were doing right away. Of course, the difference is that the god doesn't really promise you won't get killed by the serial killer, only that you will get to sing the praises of the police in heaven.

 

[1137]

If you refuse to accept the fact that your "metaphor" is severely lacking, then there is nothing more to do but let you destroy your credibility.

Have a nice day.

Have you ever looked into the story of the fall of man, like, once in your life? God let's his little serpent/angel throw Adam and Eve into sin (first murder in the metaphor), then holds us in just as much danger as them, only saving us I'm return for worship, praise, preaching, etc.

 

[McBell]

Have you ever looked into the story of the fall of man, like, once in your life? God let's his little serpent/angel throw Adam and Eve into sin (first murder in the metaphor), then holds us in just as much danger as them, only saving us I'm return for worship, praise, preaching, etc.

Your "metaphor" is a fail.
Accept it and move on.

 

[NulliuSINverba]

The point is the scenario is a metaphor for the fall of man, with God as the police and the killer as the serpent/devil.

Sorry. Your chosen metaphor breaks down when scrutinized:

1.) Does "standard" Christian theology maintain that God appointed Satan to behave as he did?

If so, doesn't it follow that Satan was just doing God's bidding? Doesn't that make God the ultimate source of evil (and hence the orchestrator of mankind's downfall)?

2.) Does "standard" Christian theology maintain that God has a hit list of certain humans he's specifically targeting with the machinations of Satan? Or is all of humanity on that list?

3.) Does "standard" Christian theology maintain tha--

...

I beg your pardon. Perhaps it's actually Christian theology that breaks down when scrutinized?

 

[1137]

Your "metaphor" is a fail.
Accept it and move on.

Solid explanation.

 

[1137]

Sorry. Your chosen metaphor breaks down when scrutinized:

1.) Does "standard" Christian theology maintain that God appointed Satan to behave as he did?

If so, doesn't it follow that Satan was just doing God's bidding? Doesn't that make God the ultimate source of evil (and hence the orchestrator of mankind's downfall)?

2.) Does "standard" Christian theology maintain that God has a hit list of certain humans he's specifically targeting with the machinations of Satan? Or is all of humanity on that list?

3.) Does "standard" Christian theology maintain tha--

...

I beg your pardon. Perhaps it's actually Christian theology that breaks down when scrutinized?

1. Whether appointed or allowed, the situation is the same. It's a bad thing that could easily be stopped but was exploited instead.

2. Actually we're all on the hit list according to mainstream Christian ideology. If the devil wasn't after all of us we wouldn't all need to convert, would we.