[Closed] A philosophical question on murder.

A - Impossible to answer. Here's hoping.

B - No

do people not commit murder because of the consequences to them?

A) I'd hope yes

B) no

there's not many 'planned' murders from what I can see it's all spur of the moment stuff so I can't see fear of prison etc will prevent it.

The US seems to support that theory as even in States with the death penalty murder rates aren't very low.

yes and yes 😯

a - dont know.....I have an ex wife
B - Hope not

A. Yes
B. This would be my commuter
[IMG] [/IMG]

No to both.

Interesting question.

What prevents us from killing? The law, an innate or independently arrived-at personal moral code, or a socially conditioned moral code?

I suspect that these go from least to most applicable; ie, we don't kill primarily because society tells us it's wrong. Would you instinctively 'know' if born in isolation?

The forth reason, thinking about it, is probably 'god tells us it's wrong'; where that fits amongst the other three for a given individual is probably the most likely one to vary quite wildly.

If there were no law against murder, would murder exist as a concept?

Very interesting!

who knows...

those tribes in the middle of the rainforests have been known to have inter-tribal killing caused by, land disputes, canabalism etc... so I guess even with no Laws as such it still happens.

[i]inter-tribal killing[/i]

which then poses the question;

"Is killing during a war murder?"

"Is bombing a city knowing civilians will die murder?"

"Is a police officer shooting an someone shooting other people murder?"

suddenly it's shades of grey

If there were no law against murder, would murder exist as a concept?

Now that's what I call a philosophical question.

OP question not worth answering IMO.

If I was still here it might only be because I managed to fight off my assassins. I would have tried to kill a few people I suspect though if they thought they might get killed they'd perhaps be more careful about their behaviour.

even if there were no laws forbidding it, there would still be consequences. my decision to murder someone would be based on those consequences, not my desire to kill.
this is based on the presumption that in a world where murder was allowed by law, that the existing moral code would not apply.

My wifes father did chase me with a axe once, so have a sinking feeling I would indeed be dead & before I could do the deed in return too...

if you're going to get murdered the likelyhood is you will know the person trying to kill you and they probably never even think of the consequences or penalty of the said act. So given that the law and prison is no deterrant to most wouldbe assailants, i'm guessing yes i would be still alive, the converse is true also.

If there were no law against murder, would murder exist as a concept?

As long as humans have conscience - a sense of right and wrong - and the ability to question that conscience, the concept of unjustified killing (murder) will, or can, exist. The crime of murder is just a way of a social group agreeing on the types of killing it will accept at any given point in time.

I would be a no and a yes in that order.

What do you mean by law?

Man made statutes or the God given 10 Commandments?

Either or. God given 10 commandments were thought up by some bloke a couple of thousand years ago as laws so it makes no difference.

no, Yes

I would have killed myself in a revenge attack many years from now.

No and yes, more than one.

In fact there are people that I sometime daydream about killing in the most foul way.

SB

No

Yes

Killing members of your own species is generally not natural, although harming them often is. I suspect humans aren't much different. Murder isn't natural, and for that reason most people don't do it. Harming others is to an extent, and for that reason most people will do it at some time in their lives.

If there were no law against murder, would murder exist as a concept?

Homicide would exist whether or not it was legal.

I've lived quite a safe life, and even without laws I think most folk are well condition with an aversion to killing. Hundreds of thousands of years of moral evolution; it seems some ideas run very deep in our species and we are better off for them.

Similarly I don't know if I could bring myself to kill - death is inevitable but I'm quite against killing, myself. Might possibly do it on the spur of the moment in the defence of my own or a loved one's life. But I don't know.

Soldiers are fascinating. By becoming a soldier you are making a pre-meditated choice about killing and being killed. Like the bee hive when attacked by wasps: all the workers become kamikazes in defence of the hive.

[muses]

Wheres the fun if there are no laws.

For me the lure of murder has always been in thinking how you would get away with it.......

Killing members of your own species is generally not natural, although harming them often is. I suspect humans aren't much different. Murder isn't natural, and for that reason most people don't do it. Harming others is to an extent, and for that reason most people do it at some time in their lives.

Really? Is this fact, or your point of view?

By becoming a soldier you are making a pre-meditated choice about killing and being killed.

You are??!!!

SB

Wheres the fun if there are no laws.
For me the lure of murder has always been in thinking how you would get away with it.......

Really? Is this fact, or your point of view?

Well I offered it as a fact, not a point of view. If you do a bit of research you'll see that I'm not the only one to accept it as fact. Although of course you might not agree. I suspect from your comment that you probably don't.

I saw one fish kill another fish.

But murder is OK when it's the state that sanctions it, yeah?

A) Probably, unless I got revenge killed for the fact that I would...
B) ...almost certainly have killed one person.

But then again, for there to be no law against murder would sort of imply either a total collapse of civilisation- and I wouldn't do well in the post-apocalyptic badlands- or, a total change of moral code. So all bets are off.

@ernie_lynch - I don't disagree or agree. I'm just a little skeptical given the way some species behave.

Killing members of your own species is generally not natural, although harming them often is.

Plenty of other animals kill their rivals in ruts or to obtain mating rights, or to defend/advance their position in a social group. Some even kill their mate after/during mating. Chimps have been documented staging attacks on rival groups and slaughtering (and eating) as many as they could in territorial wars. Humans kill their own kind on a quite enormous scale. Just because something is abhorrent to many doesn't make it unnatural.

To say that it is uncommon is true enough. To say that it is not natural is simply incorrect.

I'm just a little skeptical given the way some species behave.

Which explains why I used the word "generally". Killing members of your own species is generally not natural, not even for species which need to kill every day.

But murder is OK when it's the state that sanctions it, yeah?

Yeah.

By becoming a soldier you are making a pre-meditated choice about killing and being killed.

Correct.

Being a soldier isn't all about killing is it?

Probably and Probably ! 🙁

My mother warned me that one day my now wife would push me too far and I'd kill her.

There have been occassions in the 15 years since then that the thought of having my mother visit me in prison once a week for 30 years to say "I told you so!" has made whatever the issue was to pale in comparison.

And I'm sure MrsMCTD would say the same about me!

Killing members of your own species is generally not natural

Happens all the time in the animal kingdom dunnit? Male Lions will kill the offspring of other males before taking over a pride so he can mate with the mother, for example.

Probably would be dead. Definitely would have killed someone.

Surrounded By Zulus - Member

If there were no murder laws would you: A - still be alive and B - have killed anyone yet?

A. Yes, will still be alive.

B. No, if they have seen my zombie Bennelli shotguns. (preventive)

C. If they push their luck ... yes, Bennelli shotguns will answer them (note Bennelli is auto reload so very fast).

Happens all the time in the animal kingdom dunnit?

Well I saying it doesn't happen all the time. Most species do not kill members of their own species most of the time. Sometimes some species sometimes kill members of their own species. But generally they don't. Obviously you don't agree with me though.

I'm just saying it's natural in the animal kingdom and quite common, which it is.

And I'm just saying it generally isn't natural in the animal kingdom, which it isn't.

how is something that happens in nature not natural?

😈

double post

a) most probably - I don't generally piss people off too much. Apart from the wife, of course.
b) I initially thought yes, but then I was once offered a free "hit" on someone who at the time I thought really needed it, and I turned it down. My "yes" would have been the same person.

Let me help you Jon, because I get the impression English isn't your first language.

generally
adv.
1. Popularly; widely.
2. As a rule; usually.
3. For the most part.

And I'm just saying it generally isn't natural in the animal kingdom, which it isn't.

What do you mean by "generally isn't natural"? Define: natural. Shirley you just mean that it isn't common? It only needs one example of one animal regularly killing members of its own species, thus demonstrating that it's not anomalous, and you have yourself something that could be considered natural. The example I gave of the chimps is sufficient evidence to disprove your assertion.

The point is that it DOES generally happen in the animal kingdom. I'm not arguing semantics. Another example is Female Black Widows eat Male Black Widows after they mate. It happens all the time.

druidh - Member

But murder is OK when it's the state that sanctions it, yeah?

Are you on your high horse again? 😆

Answer the questions! Stop being so anal FFS!

Why do you have to answer with a question?

🙄

It happens all the time.

No it doesn't.

Are you on your high horse again?

No it doesn't

have you googled "cannibalism in the animal kingdom"?

No I haven't, tell me about it.......is it something which most species engage in ?

Is it something which we generally find in nature ?

Are carnivores just as likely to eat their own species as they are other species ?

[img] [/img]

No, yes.

The only difference between a murderer and a hero is the opinion of their peers.

we could kill as we pleased without comeuppance? Then what would all the other laws matter really? cos you could just kill anyone that tried to enforce them. All laws would break down. I'd **** off to the hills on my bike, but I'd fall off and some twunt would come along and take my bike, and hey ho kill me in the process as there is no come-uppance anyway unless I killed hime/her first. Essentially, It'd be all about who has the best weapons and/or defenses - those who can afford them, but they would be overrun sooner or later by the numbers. A bit like a zombie movie. (that's a train of thought there...)

err a) no b) no

There are people alive because I can't afford a hitman

ooh yeah, you'd be so scary if you were rich 😉

Yes. Yes.

perhaps, Even if the laws were revoked, there would be the unwritten laws surrounding the sacredness of killing. (Who is to be forgiven, Commitalus[sp]) So laws regardless, just no consequence. Unless you count the brother of the man killing you being granted the right to kill you.

stratobiker - Being a soldier isn't all about killing is it?

it's probably some psychological test so that those who answered b) yes, can be collated and sent back by SBZ to his head office.

You're going on my list, ernie_lynch.

There was a similar discussion about this on mumsnet the other day but in relation to rape. Someone said that if rape was not illegal and sex was offered to a man on a plate, whether the the other person was willing or even conscious ALL men would rape. I thought that was a pretty sad reflection on the interactions she must've had with men to date.