Is it morally wrong to kill someone while they are asleep?

[variant]

(Emphasis mine)

Does a non-self aware, unconscious, sleeping human being have any qualities of personhood?

They are known to have developed personhood and will return to personhood upon waking. Being asleep is a brief cessation of consciousness, nothing more.

All the machinery the memories the person, are all there while unconscious, just at rest.

Do you support abortion? Because I find the bolded part of your quote to be quite interesting...

Perhaps if I thought the unborn were just sleeping it would make sense to compare the two, otherwise the analogy doesn't seem to hit the mark.

Gestation is a bit more like a mother using their body for life support.

I think the act of procuring an abortion is morally wrong (for exactly the reasons I have stated), so I would not seek one out, and I would not ask someone to seek one out on my behalf, but I also think that being alive doesn't necessarily gives someone the right to use someone else's body to survive without their continual consent.

I'm guessing you were under the impression that I had not thought my ideas through before speaking with you on this subject?

 

[durangodawood]

Its perfectly fine to kill a snoring person.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

They are known to have developed personhood and will return to personhood upon waking. Being asleep is a brief cessation of consciousness, nothing more.

But they are experiencing nothing. "They" do not exist.

All the machinery the memories the person, are all there while unconscious, just at rest.

The machinery is there. But the memories and the person are not. What qualities of personhood does a sleeping person have? Where is "the person" while they are unconscious?

Perhaps if I thought the unborn were just sleeping it would make sense to compare the two, otherwise the analogy doesn't seem to hit the mark.

To the sleeping person, there is no logical difference between a fetus and them. Neither "person" exists. Neither is self-aware. Neither has experience.

Gestation is a bit more like a mother using their body for life support.

I think the act of procuring an abortion is morally wrong (for exactly the reasons I have stated), so I would not seek one out, and I would not ask someone to seek one out on my behalf, but I also think that being alive doesn't necessarily gives someone the right to use someone else's body to survive without their continual consent.

I'm guessing you were under the impression that I had not thought my ideas through before speaking with you on this subject?

No. I have seen you post on here enough to know that you would have a well-thought out, reasonable response.

Thanks for the reply

 

[durangodawood]

But they are experiencing nothing. "They" do not exist.

Thats just silly. We all know, or believe, that the self still exists in sleep, but is simply taking a break from consciousness.

Even in dreams you feel your self, in jeopardy, or in pleasure.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Thats just silly. We all know, or believe, that the self still exists in sleep, but is simply taking a break from consciousness.

"or believe" being the key words. By any measure, the self does not exist while unconscious. Consciousness is a precursor to "self" because selfhood requires self-awareness. Without self-awareness, there is no "I" or "me".

"Simply taking a break from consciousness" essentially means "taking a break from the self existing". They are equivalent statements.

If you are taking a break from the self existing, then the self does not exist while the break is being taken.

Even in dreams you feel your self, in jeopardy, or in pleasure.

Only about 1 in 5 people have had the experience of lucid dreaming. And many of those people only experience it one or two times. It is very rare that someone experiences lucid dreaming frequently, and even in those cases, the periods of lucid dreaming make up a small fraction of the time spent asleep.

For the rest of us, and for the rest of the time spent asleep, sleeping and dreaming are not experienced, only remembered. You can remember some experience only upon becoming self-aware again when you wake up. But you do not experience it as it is happening.

 

[selfinflikted]

This is the ... dumbest OP I've seen in these parts since Autumnleaf.

Is this a serious question?

 

[durangodawood]

"or believe" being the key words. By any measure, the self does not exist while unconscious. Consciousness is a precursor to "self" because selfhood requires self-awareness. Without self-awareness, there is no "I" or "me".

Plainly false.

By the measure of what most people feel, the self persists in dreams. I feel myself at large in my dream world. I dont lucid-dream. But it feels like ME in there. Most people feel this.

What most people feel, in a way that endures, is a fine basis for a moral rule.

 

[durangodawood]

Also, the ultimate exact state of the self during sleep is not even material to the question.

What matters is what people want, expressed consciously. Almost everyone, in all times and cultures, does not want to be killed during sleep. So there's your moral basis.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Plainly false.

By the measure of what most people feel, the self persists in dreams. I feel myself at large in my dream world. I dont lucid-dream. But it feels like ME in there. Most people feel this.

Reading about consciousness, sleeping and psychology, all inform me that sleeping is a state of unconsciousness and lack of self-awareness. This has also been my experience and the experience of everyone I have ever met.

Perhaps you are the exception. You consciously experience sleep? You are aware that the time is passing as you lie in your bed? You experience dreams as they are happening? Do you experience paralysis while dreaming?

I personally only remember my dreams upon waking. And often it is a hazy memory which is poorly recollected. While asleep, I am unconscious and not self-aware. I go to bed, and I wake up in the morning and (assuming I slept continuously), it "feels" as though no time has passed.

What most people feel, in a way that endures, is a fine basis for a moral rule.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Could you rephrase or elaborate?

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Also, the ultimate exact state of the self during sleep is not even material to the question.

What matters is what people want, expressed consciously. Almost everyone, in all times and cultures, does not want to be killed during sleep. So there's your moral basis.

But it would not matter because "they" would not even know! It does "them" no harm. Harm must be experienced, right? If there is no experience, there is no experienced harm.

They would not know any different. They would not even know it had happened. They would not even be able to remember the fact that they had previously not consented to being killed in their sleep. They would go to bed and fall into unconsciousness...and remain there...forever.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

This is the ... dumbest OP I've seen in these parts since Autumnleaf.

Is this a serious question?

Not sure if you read through the thread or not.

It appears a dumb question, but it is difficult to justify. Perhaps instead of just bashing the thread, you could try to justify why it is wrong?

Its a question that raises further questions about what is the self, what is personhood, and what it actually means to kill someone.

 

[durangodawood]

Reading about consciousness, sleeping and psychology, all inform me that sleeping is a state of unconsciousness and lack of self-awareness. This has also been my experience and the experience of everyone I have ever met.

Perhaps you are the exception. You consciously experience sleep? You are aware that the time is passing as you lie in your bed? You experience dreams as they are happening? Do you experience paralysis while dreaming?

I personally only remember my dreams upon waking. And often it is a hazy memory which is poorly recollected. While asleep, I am unconscious and not self-aware. I go to bed, and I wake up in the morning and (assuming I slept continuously), it "feels" as though no time has passed.



I'm not sure what you are saying here. Could you rephrase or elaborate?

It doesnt matter what the self "really is", nor "where" the self goes during sleep or surgery or sex.

What matters for morals is: what makes life really satisfying. Pretty much ALL people in ALL times and cultures are highly dissatisfied with placing their life in jeopardy every time they sleep.

So, thats enough basis for a strong moral rule to emerge.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

It doesnt matter what the self "really is", nor "where" the self goes during sleep or surgery or sex.

What matters for morals is: what makes life really satisfying. Pretty much ALL people in ALL times and cultures are highly dissatisfied with placing their life in jeopardy every time they sleep.

So, thats enough basis for a strong moral rule to emerge.

This is a satisfying response. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[durangodawood]

This is a satisfying response. Thanks for the discussion.

For sure.

If you are a Christian, "because God says its wrong" should be enough of an answer to your question. (Is that right?)

If you dont believe in imposed or absolute morality, you have to figure out the natural reasoning for how morals emerge.

 

[selfinflikted]

Not sure if you read through the thread or not.

It appears a dumb question, but it is difficult to justify. Perhaps instead of just bashing the thread, you could try to justify why it is wrong?

Its a question that raises further questions about what is the self, what is personhood, and what it actually means to kill someone.

I read the thread. People have done just fine justifying themselves. I realize the argument you are trying to make and how it ties into a certain other argument ubiquitous in this forum. However, that tenuous connection just doesn't work. Apples and oranges.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Its perfectly fine to kill a snoring person.

Believe, I've been tempted...

 

[variant]

But they are experiencing nothing. "They" do not exist.

Generally I dream when I'm asleep, so saying this categorically seems to be jumping to a conclusion. I have indeed become fully self aware while sleeping as well so the mere act of being unconscious doesn't necessarily mean you do not exist.

I don't think people ever shut off completely so I am not sure your characterization is correct here.

The machinery is there. But the memories and the person are not. What qualities of personhood does a sleeping person have? Where is "the person" while they are unconscious?

The machinery the memories the person, all still there. You do not blink out of existence while at rest.

The person is asleep. It is something people do, and a part of who we are.

To the sleeping person, there is no logical difference between a fetus and them. Neither "person" exists. Neither is self-aware. Neither has experience.

I would say your assertion here isn't entirely founded.

The unborn fetus isn't even remotely capable of self awareness, but the gentlest nudge will wake a person up. You can even just stare at them a bit and they will wake up because they sense your presence. To compare the two seems a bit problematic.

No. I have seen you post on here enough to know that you would have a well-thought out, reasonable response.

Thanks for the reply

Thanks.

 

[Water Cross]

I'd rather ask myself what in me would cause me to even think of a question like this. Then I'd reflect and seek an answer in prayer, meditation, perhaps even in solitude for awhile.

I certainly wouldn't broadcast that my mind conceives of these notions. And ask if others think the same way as I am inclined to.

The majority of the time you are sleeping, you are unconscious (minus lucid dreaming).

Your "self" doesn't exist. "You" do not exist for that time. You go to bed at night, and you wake up without any cognition of how much time passed. You did not experience those hours of your life. "You" were gone.

If you never woke up again after going to sleep, you would never know. You would not even exist to know. You would not exist to feel sad about it. You would not exist to recollect on your life. You would not exist to feel outraged by it. You just wouldn't wake up. "You" would stop existing permanently.

So if someone were to put a poisonous gas into your bedroom while you are sleeping, and you die, is this wrong? "Who" is it harming?



Note: I'm not talking about whether it is legally wrong, but whether it is morally wrong.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Why is it people tend to jump to horrible conclusions just because someone asks a question?

Good grief...How did psychology or psychiatry ever get started? It was because someone asked a question.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I'd rather ask myself what in me would cause me to even think of a question like this. Then I'd reflect and seek an answer in prayer, meditation, perhaps even in solitude for awhile.

I certainly wouldn't broadcast that my mind conceives of these notions. And ask if others think the same way as I am inclined to.

I like to question the logic behind the morals our society upholds. Many morals are taken for granted as being "obviously true". Its nice to see people justifying why they believe what they believe.

Furthermore, I can see you are pro-life. One of the reasons this thought occurred to me is that pro-choice folks often use "personhood" or "consciousness" or "lack of awareness of harm" as reasons why it is okay to destroy a fetus. My argument is that a sleeping person does not fulfill any of those qualifications and thus it would be logically valid to kill a sleeping person in the same way you kill a fetus.


I think durangodawood did a good job of destroying my case by stating that what is moral is what we wish for while conscious. The vast majority of us would consciously acknowledge that we do not wish to be killed while unconscious.