Here is one of the most interesting questions I’ve ever come across as far as morality is concerned.
If you were the last person on earth, and told by some higher power that there is 1 day left for all of earth and you were placed in two situations:
1. In a forest with an axe – would you cut a huge tree down, just to see it fall?
2. In the middle of a city with some TNT – would you blow up a building just to see it fall?
I think I would blow up the building, this way it takes less of a toll on nature after I am gone and little creatures can make homes in the rubble. If I chopped down a tree I would be chopping down the home of tonnes of wildlife; salamanders, birds, raccoon, squirrels and so on.
I would stand at the top of the building, detonate the tnt and ride the concrete wave down. If I live, I probably had a blast(pun intended). And if I don’t, I went out on my own accord, the world was going to end tommorow anyway and it could have been a more painful death.
I would do both, and then find more ways to pass the twenty-three and a half hours I had left. Morality should be defined by intent. Malicious destruction doesn’t equate to creative deconstruction in my mind, but this could be indulgence.
I liked the thought, though.
Yes. But where does morality come into it? Morality, as far as I am concerned, only applies to that which can conceptualize it. A tree, and an animal for that matter, don’t give a shit about morality, it is irrelevant to them. The only thing to consider is my own feelings, I could not torture an animal but, although a tree has a manner of perception, it does not have a nervous system or a memory so how can it suffer?
@aliwine, You missed the part “here is 1 day left for all of earth and you were placed in two situations” which makes it more interesting – after you blow it up, basically everything is gone.
@yoinkie, That might hurt. A lot.
@mimic, So you would enjoy the “creative deconstruction” over preservation of another living thing’s last hours, and a construct of the human race.
@trek79, That wasn’t what I was going for, but the questiong is very open to that.
My initial reason for posting is to see if one person would feel bad about killing the tree, but not the building.
Personally I would much rather enjoy the presence of the tree, than its destruction, and I would feel bad for cutting it down. Logically this doesn’t make much sense, but it would definitely manifest in my consciousness.
The building, after I blew it up, I’d be sad I didn’t have more dynamite.
the trees are extensions of our lungs, cutting down the tree just for kicks is rather masochistic..
@ijesuschrist, yeah but why would i kill the tree?…i still wouldn`t kill the tree because i would have no reason to do so, instead of feeding my frustration via destruction, i would rather find peace of mind and be fully joyous for my last 24 hours ….
@seeker, That is the beauty of this question. Some will say “why would I kill it” while others would say they would, because why not, everything is going to cease to exist shortly anyway, why not watch a huge tree fall? It would be pretty cool wouldn’t it?
@ijesuschrist, true, but it might not hurt that much at all. I guess im just not ok with “you’re going to die, no chance of anything else happening.” I always imagined my last battle to live as something that could go either way, I want to go down fighting. Plus, what better way to die then to feel all of life beforehand(pain).
It would be especially cool if the tree was on a hill or mountain side and cut a path of destruction in its wake. But now I’m thinking of all the animals and their babies that live in the trees who could be hurt in the process.
Here is an interesting moral conundrum: I seen a still mouse in my room not long ago and when I went to throw it out it was still alive but clearly dying. I don’t know if it was from natural causes or if it took some bait from somewhere, but people talk about how it is humane to put it out of its misery. But I didn’t, I scooped it up and threw it out in the garden, my reasoning is this: I have experienced killing animals before, specifically by putting them out of their misery, and the crunch, nerve spasms and waning of life effects me, but animals have been dying for millions of years without the benefit of human compassion, so I was just letting nature take its course.
So, moral conundrum: Do you put an animal out of its misery or not?
If I am the last person on Earth, I’d be the only person on the planet. Which means, morality and higher powers would not exist anymore. I would be wondering, what happened to all the stupid people on the planet, and probably regret how I never got to kill any of them, because of my morals.
@trek79, It depends on the animal for me to be honest. If it tastes good and I know I would use it’s body and such for consuming and making something then I would feel much better about killing it because it’s death would not be in vain. However if it was something I couldn’t eat or use it’s pelt/bones I would probably try to nurse it back into health- who doesn’t love something cute to cuddle with?
@aliwine, alright. It says a lot.
@trek79, I too don’t really like the idea of putting an animal out of its misery. I just don’t know. Perhaps it is actually having one of those beautiful “light tunnel” experiences? I just don’t know. I did kill a fox once that was stuck in my own trap. It took a long time to kill it and I felt awful for days. It was my first encounter with sincere empathy of death (albeit through an animal).
@beyond, I still think that is a moral decision; that “there are no morals left if one man lives”
@ijesuschrist, are you sure? :) Imagine if you really are alone in the universe. Or imagine your mother was the last person on Earth, but she was pregnant.
If you are the only living being from the human species on this planet, absolutely nothing that was written will matter. You’ll have experience, but no moralizing. You know what moralizing is. Preaching morals. There won’t be anyone around. Wake up, Neo!