I heard a rumor and I don't know if its true. But it makes for an interesting starting point for a SKIL Dinner discussion. The rumor is that some derivative of the drug RU-486 has the capability of making a woman who just gave birth (that has a unique set of hormones active) permanently infertile. In summary putting this drug in the water supply implements a one child per family program.You have a bottle of this chemical. No one knows the chemical exists or that you have it.
The dinner question: Is it more moral to
To begin the discussion, guests declare, one at a time, going around the table what action they would take -- in pocket or -- in water supply.Then each is given two minutes, uninterrupted time to state the most important concepts on which they based their decision. The rest of the evening is open discussion.
------ more background --
This dinner becomes a discussion about how different thinking and learning processes affect
the above choice in behavior and not a discussion about the character of the dinner guests. What kind of thinking process would find this implementation of RPD
inappropriate. What kind of thinking process would find this implementation
of RPD appropriate.
It is obvious that if a person was turned into a zombie and did not realize that his acts were hurtful, then it would be OK to restrain him or her against his or her will. Isn't the RU-486 proposal about the same thing. A person has the second child partly because the resulting death caused by the act of facilitating the life of a second child is absent from their view of consequences or within their view but undervalued.
In this reference, the appropriateness of the RU-486 derivative decision, depends on if the RU-486 actor has adequate thinking processes to see and value the future individuals who will be killed by the parent's act of having a second child.