Nuke War Outweighs The risk of extinction via nuclear war outweighs all ethics demands you evaluate our disad – Seeley 86. [Robert Seeley, Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors, 1986, The Handbook of Non-Violence, p. 269-70] Supporters argued that projections of extinction, of U. S. and Soviet nuclear policy have human extensive environmental are not conclusively true, but it does not follow, that damage, and so on established. This is as nuclear supporters suggest, we are thereby morally free to choose suicidal policies. prediction of made our current In moral reasoning consequences is nearly always impossible. One balances risks of an action against its benefits; one also the considers known damage the action would do. Thus a surgeon deciding whether to perform an what in operation weighs the known effects loss of nerve function, and risks (death) against the (the some for example) benefits, and weighs also the risks and benefits of not performing surgery. Morally, however, human extinction is unlike any other risk. No conceivable human good could be worth extinction for in the of the race, order to a human good it must be experienced by human Thus extinction is one result we be beings. dare not—risk. Though not conclusively established, the risk of extinction is real enough to make nuclear war utterly impermissible under any sane moral code.
Nuke War Outweighs The risk of extinction via nuclear war outweighs all – ethics demands you evaluate our disad Seeley 86. [Robert Seeley, Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors, 1986, The Handbook of Non-Violence, p. 269-70] Supporters of U. S. and Soviet nuclear policy have argued that projections of human extinction, extensive environmental damage, and so on are not conclusively established. This is true, but it does not follow, as nuclear supporters suggest, that we are thereby made morally free to choose our current suicidal policies. In moral reasoning prediction of consequences is nearly always impossible. One balances the risks of an action against its benefits; one also considers what known damage the action would do. Thus a surgeon in deciding whether to perform an operation weighs the known effects (the loss of some nerve function, for example) and risks (death) against the benefits, and weighs also the risks and benefits of not performing surgery. Morally, however, human extinction is unlike any other risk. No conceivable human good could be worth the extinction of the race, for in order to be a human good it must be experienced by human beings. Thus extinction is one result we dare not—risk. Though not conclusively established, the risk of extinction is real enough to make nuclear war utterly impermissible under any sane moral code.