Customize - Urban Dictionary Store

Pro Customization

Create unique products with your own words and definitions

Preview

Personalize Your Design

Your Word

Your Definition

Your faux ethical dilemma regarding the organ transplant can only exist in a vaccum (Though you may be right that people do ENGAGE IN ethical emotivism). As I see it, your proposition isn't a singular linear line of reasoning. How you're thinking about it seems to be this: If you can -1 to +5 should you do that. But really your proposition is the intersection of several constituent elements regarding personal property rights (Does the person own their organs), consent (Is it ethical to take something from someone else without consent), authority (Is it ethical for a "We" to have authority over an individual). So, if yes (you ought to take the organs) do you have to reconcile with the constituent elements of the proposition? If it's ethical for "a group to take the organs from 1 to save 5 people" is it, then, also ethical for "a group to take the property of an individual without their consent" (in a broader sense)? Or are you just making a 1 time exception for this guy? Or is whether or not it's ethical contingent on what you're taking and whether or not you're saving lives? You see the distinction I'm trying to make, right? Maybe I'm not understanding it properly.

Text fits