[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The end does not necessarily justify the means.

Then it's not really the end. It's just an instrumental goal to help achieving the real terminal goal. In this case, it's still implicit.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I can share the goal of living in heaven for ever. I might even agree that it can be achieved by killing others.

Really? After you die?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

But the action still fails the moral test because I wouldn't like anyone to kill me, and I wouldn't like to kill my nearest and dearest.

If someone don't mind anyone to kill them, nor someone they love, can they kill anyone else?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

the only way

Perhaps you haven't looked hard enough.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The word "terminal" in the phrase "universal terminal goal" emphasizes the importance of time domain over space domain. The existence of a finite number of conscious beings for infinite time is better than the existence of infinite number of conscious beings for finite time.

Saving more people is an instrumental goal, assuming that it would make society less likely to go extinct. But when the available resources are inadequate, saving more people now might end up killing more people later.

[alancalverd]

I can share the goal of living in heaven for ever. I might even agree that it can be achieved by killing others.

Really? After you die?

Why not? It's a fairly common belief, apparently. Absurdity is no  barrier to faith.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I can share the goal of living in heaven for ever. I might even agree that it can be achieved by killing others.

Really? After you die?

Why not? It's a fairly common belief, apparently. Absurdity is no  barrier to faith.

Well, that surprises me.
I thought you don't believe in after life.
But who am I to judge?

[alancalverd]

I don't believe in anything, but I am as capable of belief as anyone: I just choose not to use that capacity.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I don't believe in anything

I thought you believe that politicians are inherently corrupt.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Some brain damages can severely limited someone's capability to think.
Someone may lose the capability to make new memory.
Someone may lose the capability to predict the consequences of their actions.
Someone may lose the capability to move properly.
Someone may become more violent, like Charles Whitman.
Someone may lose the capability to follow any moral standard.
Then following moral standards would be the obligation of those who has the capability to follow them. The obligation includes making sure that the society's terminal goal is not jeopardized by those who can't follow its moral standard, e.g. by placing them in mental asylums, or keeping them out of power which will make their erroneous actions negatively affect more people.

[alancalverd]

I don't believe in anything

I thought you believe that politicians are inherently corrupt.

More of a working hypothesis based on observation. There are enough exceptions that it can't be a matter of belief.

[alancalverd]

Then following moral standards would be the obligation of those who has the capability to follow them.

The principle has been established in US jurisprudence, that a defendant who claims that he is genetically disposed to murder is presumed to have pleaded guilty. Excellent principle - judgement and punishment must be based on what was done, not why (except for selfdefence).

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

The principle has been established in US jurisprudence, that a defendant who claims that he is genetically disposed to murder is presumed to have pleaded guilty. Excellent principle - judgement and punishment must be based on what was done, not why (except for selfdefence).

What makes the principle excellent?

[alancalverd]

On what other basis should you judge all men equally? The object of statute law is to define what society considers unacceptable behavior and to prevent or punish it in proportion to the harm done.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Your criteria are based on feelings and emotions, which are known to be deceiving sometimes.

Taken for granted, feeling or emotion based actions, or instinctive actions, are usually better than just random actions. We don't just randomly stop breathing, or stop eating,
or just jump off the cliff, or punch strangers in the face.
But rational actions based on longer term goals and adequately accurate knowledge of causality can often give even better results.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

On what other basis should you judge all men equally?

Based on whatever it takes to achieve the longest term goals. What do you think presidential/royal pardon were created for?
They were necessary for reconciliation after violent conflicts like civil war.

[alancalverd]

What do you think presidential/royal pardon were created for?

For the greater glory of presidents and kings. Never assume a benificent motive.

Reconciliation is achieved by rapid judicial process followed by a few public hangings, and a slow replacement of politics by trade. Gradually, the human race is beginning to understand that you don't make much profit by declaring war on your customers.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Never assume a benificent motive.

Why not?
There must be some considerations why Japanese Emperor wasn't executed after WWII, or Gen. Lee after American civil war.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Reconciliation is achieved by rapid judicial process followed by a few public hangings, and a slow replacement of politics by trade. Gradually, the human race is beginning to understand that you don't make much profit by declaring war on your customers.

That could be true if your side can win the war within acceptable costs and risks.

[alancalverd]

There must be some considerations why Japanese Emperor wasn't executed after WWII, or Gen. Lee after American civil war.

It's always good to appear magnanimous in victory, however many people you killed to get there. Some backward people think that having the president pardon one turkey justifies killing all the others.