Can murder be justified by the "greater good"?

Question:I just recently watched an episode of Sliders that featured a world where "Lottery" was used as a means of population control. People would take money from the Lottery machine and the more money they took the more chances they had to win the lottery. The prize was $5,000,000, anything they wanted but in a few days they had to "make way". Because of the small population the world thrived.

Keep in mind that all people willingly participated in the lottery knowing the consequences (excluding wade but ignore her for the sake of the question).

What do you think? Is this justifiable? No hunger, no poverty, no wars?

P.S. Don't forget to star this question if you like it :)

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: I just recently watched an episode of Sliders that featured a world where "Lottery" was used as a means of population control. People would take money from the Lottery machine and the more money they took the more chances they had to win the lottery. The prize was $5,000,000, anything they wanted but in a few days they had to "make way". Because of the small population the world thrived.

Keep in mind that all people willingly participated in the lottery knowing the consequences (excluding wade but ignore her for the sake of the question).

What do you think? Is this justifiable? No hunger, no poverty, no wars?

P.S. Don't forget to star this question if you like it :)

Yaoi Shonen-ai has already given one of the best answers I have ever read on this forum. I can only echo some of his concerns.

It is indeed a slippery slope we travel when we empower governments to have such influence over our lives and your particular example seems to feed into a dangerous and unscrupulous mentality. Do you really believe that greed is fair reason for gambling your life? Isn't this solution a bit too simple even for hypothetical consideration? At the same time, these types of solutions negate the possibility of finding really effective problem solving methods in our complex world.

Many people will probably find your hypothetical solution to be entertaining or even practical. But I shutter to think about the kind of life we would have in reality if that kind of thinking ever gained popularity.

Yes, it was an interesting question and I will give it a star. I am glad to see some thoughtful and responsible responses to the question.

EDIT: As far as population control in general, we haven't had very good results with that in many parts of the world. Educated people who are aware of the need tend to have fewer offspring - we are creating a situation of "Dumbing Down the Population." In China (PRC) there are harsh penalties for having more than two children; like not increasing sallaries or not issuing larger food rations. The govenment has too much power in the people's lives and living conditions are often intollerable.

There have been several books and movies based on population control....

When it finally happens, it will probably be more like Arthur Clarkes concept..
Everyone gives sperm and egg samples, and then are sterilized, you then apply for each individual child, based on your accomplishments......

I think so.

"Murder for the 'greater good' " is Lenninism/Stalinism/Maoism. It is your life for your neighbors, when push comes to shove. That push usually comes down to economics--e.g., can't grow enough food; not enough natural resourses; but all these "reasons" are excuses:

"For centuries, the battle of morality was fought between those who claimed that your life belongs to God and those who claimed that it belongs to your neighbors..." [1] Lenninism/Stalinism/Maoism mandates it to your neighbors, and wipes out God. "...And no one came to say that your life belongs to you and that the good is to live it."

Those who would enforce the "greater good" are a "group" because every tyrant needs right hand men.
"Any group or "collective," large or small, is only a number of individuals. A group can have no rights other than the rights of its individual members." [2]

This means no such group can do what you yourself or your neighbor may do, and that is to sacrifice even one person by your own initiative "for the greater good." Therefore, no group has that right, either.

Well, technically what you are detailing here is not murder. Its like raping the willing, you just can't do it. They know whats happening, therefore they know death is coming for them. And they accept it willingly as you put it. Its more like assisted suicide, somehow twisted and brainwashed into that particular society. So in that situation I would have to agree it was for the greater good. It must be, because it worked long enough to get to that point in time.

Keep in mind that if someone voluntarily does something that is likely to get themselves killed, it's suicide instead of murder. Indeed, usually when a society causes someone to be killed it's not called murder at all - as in wars and executions. And no matter how idyllic a society is, there are likely to be criminals because some resources cannot be freely duplicated (a.k.a. two people who love the same monogamous person).

It is likewise worth mentioning that it is not population that is ever the problem, but population in excess of resources. It takes people to grow crops, produce goods, and invent new ones. If you get rid of people across the board you have less needs but you also have less goods.

This is the first time in human history when there have been more overweight people than starving ones. There has also never been a time in human history when our population was larger than it is now. Again, it is not population intrinsically that is the problem.

It's hard to answer this because if we were born and raised into this system we'd have a better grasp of it. I think from the Earth's perspective, it's a good thing. We'd have a lot more resources to go around. From a humanity point of view, I don't think it would work. Simply because there are so many greedy individuals who would rig this lottery to their advantage. Hmm, sort of like someone we know, eh?

Good and Bad are just labels we apply to actions to help us define the world around us. Murder is not good or bad, it just is, like all other things.

I think we need to start population control right now. id say 6 billion people is way to much. 3 sounds much much better. and like Nietzsches theory only the strong and healthy should live. the weak, crippled, non self sufficent humans should be put to sleep. we gotta put natural selection back on track or else were gunna have a world full of weak individuals.