The Moral Instinct

part of a debate on the Moral Instinct on nz.general
-----
Now here is a moral question. An eighty nine year old Nazi is being deported
to Germany to stand trial for what we now consider crimes, committed sixty
years ago. But at that time, he would have been doing his duty as he was ordered
to.

So what would we have done? Refused? Of course, we all would say. Nothing
could induce us to behave like that.

But how can we really be sure, if we had found ourselves in the same
circumstances, after growing up in Hitler's Reich?
Isn't there just a tiny fraction of a doubt?

Now look at something on the Allied side. Would we have bombed Hiroshima, if
it had been our duty? Of course. It was just another bombing raid, wasn't
it?
But suppose we had known in advance what the bomb would do. Would we still
have been willing to drop it?

And how about bombing Nagasaki, knowing then what the bomb would do?

And a question for those old enough, how did you feel when you heard the
news?
Horror, or triumph? No need to answer, just think about it.

Aren't morals a dangerous luxury in wartime?

------
Does anyone want to continue the debate here?