Thanks for sharing your view

How so little has changed…

Wholly irrelevant to the question of whether it’s ethical or not. The debate over whether it’s feasible is a separate debate entirely. I asked if it’s ethical/moral.

Have you ever read about the K-19 sub disaster? I like to contrast the two examples:

When the sub began to experience a meltdown, the captain got suicidal thoughts:

“At one point, I thought of going down to my cabin, drawing my pistol and finishing all my problems at once,” he said.

But rather than go himself into the reactor, he got ‘volunteers’ to sacrifice their lives to go in and repair.

Also, if you read the entire comments section, you’ll see that others have in fact already mentioned that example.

I know. It’s a fair point and I do agree: if you knew it would be less effective than something else, it would be unethical because you’re not doing the best you can, which would put more lives at danger when you could have a higher chance to save more

Not at all. Hey, if you can link effectiveness to the ethics, fantastic. All I was saying was I was more focused on the ethics rather than the effectiveness, which I do think is a debate on its own. However, if you can make the case to justify the ethics in relation to the effectiveness, I’ll definitely read it.

Yeah, that war did not go as planned for lil’ Putin, so now he had to plug up his soldiers with all manner of people, and pawning off his financial crisis on his lackey the prime minister. In any case, I wouldn’t be surprised if he was subjecting suicidal people to the ‘army’

lol yeah

I worded it badly by saying ‘risk’, what I meant was ethical/moral ambiguity (or risk to ethical/morality) I admit it, I amended it

I mean, I’ve never seen the movie, I’ve just read about his story. But yeah, I agree: the media did him wrong (to some extent)

I do agree, although I think there’s ambiguity with either being used tbh. It’s like, take 9/11 for example: when the police helicopters saw the north tower sinking on one side, the fire department immediately ordered all firefighters to evacuate, despite knowing full well that there were a lot of people still trapped above. It’s undoubtedly ethical/moral to save your own life, but is it ethical/moral to leave them trapped? Even though it arguably is, it’s still questionable.

Pretty sure Russia is likely already doing it to some extent to make up its dwindling army

Or russias

I know they aren’t, I’m just curious about the ethics/morals of such an idea is all. Obviously if it was put into practice, the effectiveness would undoubtedly need to be considered. However, as I said before, this isn’t being put into practice — it’s a discussion on Lemmy.

Yes, although there is one interesting point about the K-19: according to the captain of the sub, when the disaster began, he did began to experience suicidal thoughts:

“At one point, I thought of going down to my cabin, drawing my pistol and finishing all my problems at once,” he said.

What I find interesting is that though he continued on, he didn’t voluntarily go into the reactor himself, instead sending ‘volunteers’ in.

Source: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-01-03-mn-8123-story.html

That’s exactly why I don’t fully understand critics of that J. Ismay or whatever his name was: if he hadn’t jumped into the rescue boat, it would’ve only meant another name added to the death list

I prefer the K-19 reactor repair tbh

In addition to this, I think the concept is cruel. If one supports the ability of those who want to die to do so, they should be able to do it with dignity and not risking a painful death or surviving with debilitating injury.

TL;DR to be honest, that last paragraph was all I was asking about. Thanks for sharing your view.

I see your point, but I wasn’t asking wether it would be effective, only wether the idea itself is ethical or moral

Even just casual people who they never met? I suppose when you’re in that mindset perhaps it’s hard to think of others maybe. That said, it doesn’t answer wether it would be ethical/moral, only wether it would be effective