Turn on thread page Beta

Is there ever any excuse for cannibalism? watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    I was wondering if people think that there is ever any situation when cannibalism is the right way to go. I mean obviously I am not advocating going out, killing and eating. But in a life or death situation would it be morally acceptible?
    Offline

    13
    NB: critical point in this discussion in the distinction between the person and the body.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I wouldn't have a problem if they were already dead and I was pretty desparate - http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/s..._the_andes.php but if I was at sea and had to kill someone, then I doubt I could.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, if its best for the majority then I think it would be, killing the weakest member is okay if more than one person could survive because of it.

    The Donner Party is a crazy example of this though, wikipedia it or something I cant be bothered to explain but what some of them did, I dont think, was right...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    I certainly agree that it is right if a whole group would be able to survive etc. But they would have to be dead already, like, died in a crash or something. Killing people is a LAST resort.

    And if you did have to kill someone, they would have to be the most useless member of the group. E.G. We discussed this in an AS law lesson last year:

    Mechanic, teacher, priest, lawyer, doctor. I think there may have been a sixth but I cannot remember, probably an office worker or a computer technician. Who do you kill first?

    Blatantly the priest. The least useful member of the group.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonah Ramone)
    I certainly agree that it is right if a whole group would be able to survive etc. But they would have to be dead already, like, died in a crash or something. Killing people is a LAST resort.And if you did have to kill someone, they would have to be the most useless member of the group. E.G. We discussed this in an AS law lesson last year:

    Mechanic, teacher, priest, lawyer, doctor. I think there may have been a sixth but I cannot remember, probably an office worker or a computer technician. Who do you kill first?

    Blatantly the priest. The least useful member of the group.
    Yes, and with the Donner Party, they went a randomly picked a person to murder, literally. They picked a healthy,fit, strong man, not one of the elderly or young. The guy knew he was going to die and went crazy it was disturbing for him and everyone else. That is the severe problem with telling somone that you are going to murder and then eat them.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    If it was a situation to me where it was eat someone or starve to death then I think it would be acceptable for me to eat them for my own survival. I don't think I'd have the heart to kill someone (they'd have to be dead) but then again - if I was starving, desperate and scared for my life then I really don't know how I'd act.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jog.Ra.Fee.)
    That is the severe problem with telling somone that you are going to murder and then eat them.
    Lol. Indeed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by parsleythelion)
    Lol. Indeed.
    After re-reading what I typed, it sounds stupid, there are lots of problems linked with telling somebody "Hey, where going to eat your liver with some nice fava beans" kind of thing :laugh:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hunger?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by parsleythelion)
    Lol. Indeed.
    :ditto:

    Jog.Ra, thanks for making me chuckle
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by Jog.Ra.Fee.)
    That is the severe problem with telling somone that you are going to murder and then eat them.
    A great analogy there.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I hope that I never have to be in a situation in which I have to eat another human being, but if I had to to survive, I would.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jog.Ra.Fee.)
    That is the severe problem with telling somone that you are going to murder and then eat them.
    id pee in the soup
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Cougar)
    I wouldn't have a problem if they were already dead and I was pretty desparate - http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/s..._the_andes.php but if I was at sea and had to kill someone, then I doubt I could.
    have you seen the film of that story?
    its really harrowing.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Jonah Ramone)
    I certainly agree that it is right if a whole group would be able to survive etc. But they would have to be dead already, like, died in a crash or something. Killing people is a LAST resort.

    And if you did have to kill someone, they would have to be the most useless member of the group. E.G. We discussed this in an AS law lesson last year:

    Mechanic, teacher, priest, lawyer, doctor. I think there may have been a sixth but I cannot remember, probably an office worker or a computer technician. Who do you kill first?

    Blatantly the priest. The least useful member of the group.
    nuts to that, kill the lawyer. if you have been in a crash what the hell is the lawyer gonna do?
    the teacher may be a science teacher or a mathmo or something that might be useful. the priest will cover the base in case god really does exist.
    but the lawyer...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr.Chavez)
    nuts to that, kill the lawyer. if you have been in a crash what the hell is the lawyer gonna do?
    the teacher may be a science teacher or a mathmo or something that might be useful. the priest will cover the base in case god really does exist.
    but the lawyer...
    are you crazy? The priest would have to go, useless idiot who'd probably divide the survivors into warring factions before buggering whatever little boys are about. Plus, the lawyer, while maybe not good for his vocation in the situation, is likely to be an itelligent guy, with trasferrable skills. If you want to make a new start, best to keep the stronger intellects in the group, to make the race stronger when it all gets going......


    and nope, i couldnt kill someone. Iwould eat if i had to though. Apparantly humans taste like pork.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonah Ramone)
    I was wondering if people think that there is ever any situation when cannibalism is the right way to go. I mean obviously I am not advocating going out, killing and eating. But in a life or death situation would it be morally acceptible?
    Yes. Only if it is the lesser of two evils. If one is to be eaten in order to save the life of others than them all dying of starvation then the former is preferred. Reminds me of Dudley and Stephens here.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like exams?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.