|
Kantian ethics suggest this is wrong. The reason being his whole catagorical imperative. But I won't get into that in too much detail.
Consider this scenario:
10 people have cancer, 1 bum on the street holds the cure. Imagine killing bum to save the 10 people. Sounds great, right? well, not according to Kant. He suggests that those 10 people who were saved would, by proxy, be murders too. Their life depends on the murder of the bum. Murdering is wrong, ergo, one should not murder the bum, even for 10 lives.
Kant believed in the concept of a priori universal Truths (something that has been put to death, surely). I am not doing him justice, however. But in this case, Kant seems to have a pretty solid idea.
|