To perform an act that is morally wrong is to offend against humanity, and all offenses against humanity are equally bad. Because murder is morally wrong, it is just as bad to have murdered one person by setting off a bomb as it would have been to have murdered a hundred people by setting off that bomb.
Which one of the following judgments conforms to the principles invoked above?
Given:It is easy to answer such questions if we draw a map of events that occur.
All morally wrong ==offend against humanity== equally badwhich means:
All morally wrong == equally badmurder is morally wrong==murdering one person==murdering hundred people
(A) If lying is morally wrong, telling a lie is as bad as murdering someone.
lying is morally wrong==telling a lie ==murdering someone
(B) Risking one’s life to save the lives of a hundred people is morally no better than risking one’s life to save one person.
Irrelevant(C) If stealing is morally wrong, it is equally important to society to prevent people from stealing as it is to prevent then from committing murder.
Irrelevant(D) Accidentally causing the death of a person is just as bad as murdering that person.
Accidentally causing the death is not morally wrong. So Irrelevant.(E) In a situation in which the life of one person can be saved only by killing another person, killing and not killing are equally bad.
We don't know whether saving someone by killing other is immoral.May be you kill the murderer to save the cop(morally correct) OR you kill the cop to save the murderer(morally wrong). Who knows. So Irrelevant.Our answer is A.