Do you think there are similarities between the meta values of this case? To clarify, I mean do you think that there is a guilt the people have to live with if they watch the other person die?
Max Sosland
13.01.20159:56
ADINA: Rabbi Akiva would reason that the men were right in sacrificing one life to save the rest, whereas Ben Petura would argue that the men were wrong in treating the boy who was killed as if his life was not as valuable as the rest of them. Because the men placed different values on each of their lives – rather than acting in the morality of loving your neighbor as yourself – they chose the path that Rabbi Akiva would have probably dictated for them; they chose to save the greater whole over acting fairly.
But in the case of R v Dudley and Stephens the boy they killed was dying and would have been dead first. In the same way in the desert, both people were essentially dying without the water. By drinking the water, which Rabbi Akiva says is the right thing to do, you are altering the other persons life directly and effectively murdering them. They are the same case and so Rabbi Akiva would stand by his first reasoning.3
Ari Spellman
13.01.20159:54
It is obvious that the case of the Cannibalism at Sea is both similar and different to that of the two men in the dessert. On the boat, Rabbi Akiva’s opinion would be wrong. IN the dessert, one man had the water; one man had life in his hands. Rabbi Akiva would agree that if one man had the water, the other man cannot kill the water man to get the water. Just as in the dessert, the men on the boat are the one without “the water,” therefore, they cannot kill to get what they need to survive.
Last Posts
come back talia!!!!!
Do you think there are similarities between the meta values of this case? To clarify, I mean do you think that there is a guilt the people have to live with if they watch the other person die?
But in the case of R v Dudley and Stephens the boy they killed was dying and would have been dead first. In the same way in the desert, both people were essentially dying without the water. By drinking the water, which Rabbi Akiva says is the right thing to do, you are altering the other persons life directly and effectively murdering them. They are the same case and so Rabbi Akiva would stand by his first reasoning.3
Last Sources
Members
Joshua Silverman
Max Sosland
Talia Weiner
Yali Berger
Ari Spellman
Alana Spellman