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

[Hetta]

You would not be here to mourn the fact that you didn't get to see your kids grow up and marry and enjoy their kids. And you would have had no fear or harm come to you. You would not even had a single moment to think about such a thing. You would be unconscious when you go to bed, and you would not wake up. You go to bed thinking about your kids and loving your kids. And that's it. Regret is not possible if you don't exist.

You don't know what people know after death, because you haven't died yet.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

How does an unconscious person not exist?

An unconscious person does not exist. Can you explain how an unconscious person exists?

Your whole self relies on you being conscious. If you are not conscious, then you are completely unaware of the universe. You are no longer self-aware, by definition of being unconscious.

Because you are not self-aware, anything that happens to you while you are unconscious does not affect "you". Upon returning to consciousness, some of the effects may be apparent (as in the case of rape or torture). Upon becoming self-aware, these effects may be troublesome and will harm you physically or emotionally.

However, if you never return to consciousness, then anything that happens to you, does not effect you because you are not self-aware.

In that case you can do anything you want to that non-existent person .. because they don't exist. So why not rape? Because it wakes them up? So a person only 'exists' when they are awake? That's just silly. There is nothing about sleep that makes a person not exist.

If you are unconscious, the "you", the "self", the "person" does not exist. By definition. That's what unconsciousness is.

I am one of the lightest sleepers that I know - mainly because I am a mom. I wake up when a floorboard in another room creaks. The chances are that I would wake up when I heard the hiss of gas and, guess what, I now exist. So are you going to keep on pumping gas into the room now that I exist.

There would be no hiss of gas. Why would you assume there would be?

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

The OP hasn't thought this through or is using very flawed logic.

Of course it's still you when you're sleeping.

Your spouse needs to sleep with one eye open. Or in a separate bedroom. Or maybe in a different house.

Can you point out my flawed logic?

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

You don't know what people know after death, because you haven't died yet.

Indeed. I am starting from the assumption that there is nothing beyond death.

This may be a flawed assumption.

I was actually hoping more people would respond to this thread who do not believe in an afterlife. So far it has only been Christians who have responded…not sure why.

 

[Hetta]

An unconscious person does not exist. Can you explain how an unconscious person exists?

Your whole self relies on you being conscious. If you are not conscious, then you are completely unaware of the universe. You are no longer self-aware, by definition of being unconscious.

If my whole self relies on being conscious, I would be dead when I fell asleep.

Because you are not self-aware, anything that happens to you while you are unconscious does not affect "you". Upon returning to consciousness, some of the effects may be apparent (as in the case of rape or torture). Upon becoming self-aware, these effects may be troublesome and will harm you physically or emotionally.

Before you said that a person raped in their sleep would wake up - so evidently a person is affected by what happens to them while they are asleep - or they wouldn't notice the rape/torture.

However, if you never return to consciousness, then anything that happens to you, does not effect you because you are not self-aware.

If you are unconscious, the "you", the "self", the "person" does not exist. By definition. That's what unconsciousness is.

A sleeping person continues to exist.

There would be no hiss of gas. Why would you assume there would be?

So now you're a murderer who can sneak into a house in complete silence - get around burglar alarms and a dog and people who are hyper alert, right?

 

[Hetta]

I was actually hoping more people would respond to this thread who do not believe in an afterlife. So far it has only been Christians who have responded…not sure why.

All of the non-Christians are out having a good time on a Saturday night.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Your thoughts on people's "existence" is pretty scary and immoral in itself.

Why is it immoral?

It sounds as though you would be the one with "no regrets" if you gassed a sleeping person.

Haha. This is purely a thought experiment to see if people can justify why it is immoral. Its a really weird topic, I know. The thought occurred to me as I was falling asleep last night. I realized that if there is no afterlife, then death and unconsciousness are basically equivalent. Both lack a conscious self-aware being that is able to feel and reflect upon circumstance. If someone were to kill me in my sleep, I would not be around to even realize it had happened. No harm would be done to me because I would not be self-aware to acknowledge "harm". I would not even be aware it happened. If it causes no harm, then why is it immoral?

I promise I'm not planning on gassing someone.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

All of the non-Christians are out having a good time on a Saturday night.

I live out west. So I guess all the atheists are having an afternoon party

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

If my whole self relies on being conscious, I would be dead when I fell asleep.

Exactly.

Before you said that a person raped in their sleep would wake up - so evidently a person is affected by what happens to them while they are asleep - or they wouldn't notice the rape/torture.

They are not self-aware when asleep.

They become self-aware when they are no longer asleep. Consciousness somehow returns…very bizarre.

A person being raped is unaware of the rape while they are unconscious. By definition.

I've already highlighted the differences between gassing someone and raping someone in their sleep:

1) Raping them has a very, very, very high likelihood that they will wake up during the act. They then become self-aware and thus are aware of the physical and emotional harm being done to them.

2) If you are gassed, you never become self-aware again. If you are raped, you will become self-aware again. And once you become self-aware, you are thus aware of the physical and emotional harm that had been done. So, even if you somehow managed to rape someone without waking them up, the fact that they will wake up and realize what had happened makes it wrong.

A sleeping person continues to exist.

In what way? You keep stating it, but you haven't explained how.

 

[Hetta]

In what way? You keep stating it, but you haven't explained how.

I exist because I still breathe, I still move, and my brain remains active. I don't need to be conscious for those things to happen. They are automatic behaviors. But if I died, they would be extinguished. I would go from alive to dead. That's the immorality. You would stop my automatic functions which otherwise would have continued to function fully.

 

[Lost Angel]

1. You can hear in your sleep.
2., you are depriving the world of said person.
3. Not being aware/feeling death does not change the fact that the person did not decide to die. You would be depriving the individual of a human right.
4. Early in a pregnancy there is no sign that the fetus has an image of self.

Morally it is wrong to destroy a persons property.

 

[variant]

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.

I find your reasoning specious.

I do not cease to exist when I am unconscious yet still alive. The reason murder is wrong is because you rob someone of the value of their future life, which in your scenario does nothing to alter this.

You would probably not be aware what happened if someone were to sneak up behind you and shot you in the back of the head either but their awareness of the wrongness is hardly even the issue.

 

[Bushido216]

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

Yes.

Unless it's Hitler. Then it's fine.

 

[RDKirk]

No, its not the same logic.

If you rape or torture a person in their sleep, then they wake up and realize that it has happened. That is wrong. Their "self" becomes conscious again afterwards and they then have to deal with what has happened while they were sleeping. They become conscious again and they have to deal with the bruises, scarring, and whatever emotional trauma comes from the knowledge that they were raped or tortured.

Furthermore, raping or torturing a person in their sleep would be very difficult to do without the person waking up. My scenario has them killed without any indication that it is happening. They never remotely regain consciousness. They never even come close to waking up. They simply just don't wake up. They don't have to deal with the bruises, scars or emotional trauma of knowing that they were killed in their sleep. They simply don't wake up.

If you never wake up, then "you" never have to deal with the fact that you died. You just remain unconscious forever. What harm is done to "you"?

Someone could drug you so that you did not wake up during the act.

You seem to be basing the morality of an action on whether someone catches you at it. If nobody catches you, it's not wrong?

 

[JustMeSee]

My uncle-in-law died unexpectedly today. The family is all torn up about it.

 

[football5680]

Murder is murder so of course it is wrong.

 

[MoneyGuy]

I don't think the OP is serious.

He's trolling us. That's the only explanation for this spurious logic.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Someone could drug you so that you did not wake up during the act.

You seem to be basing the morality of an action on whether someone catches you at it. If nobody catches you, it's not wrong?

No I'm basing it on whether it causes harm.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I don't think the OP is serious.

He's trolling us. That's the only explanation for this spurious logic.

I'm not trolling. I'm seeing if anyone can justify why it is wrong.

Its a question about what a "person" is.

Is a sleeping human still a person? Can something that is not self-aware still be a person?

If you kill a pile of living cells that happen to be human but not self-aware, is it wrong? How is it wrong if the cells are not self-aware? They would have no knowledge that you are doing it. No harm is done because harm is experiential.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I find your reasoning specious.

I do not cease to exist when I am unconscious yet still alive. The reason murder is wrong is because you rob someone of the value of their future life, which in your scenario does nothing to alter this.

You would probably not be aware what happened if someone were to sneak up behind you and shot you in the back of the head either but their awareness of the wrongness is hardly even the issue.

(Emphasis mine)

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

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