Long time no see, it seems. Should I apologise for this? Maybe not as I have a sneaking suspicion that I may be talking to myself but that is not an object of concern. I talk to myself a lot so this is just extended talking I guess.

The war photographer Don McCullin said in an interview, "I have been manipulated, and I have in turn manipulated others, by recording their response to suffering and misery. So there is guilt in every direction: guilt because I don't practice religion, guilt because I was able to walk away, while this man was dying of starvation or being murdered by another man with a gun. And I am tired of guilt, tired of saying to myself: "I didn't kill that man on that photograph, I didn't starve that child." That's why I want to photograph landscapes and flowers. I am sentencing myself to peace." I think he's saying that even though he has no part in the atrocities that he photographs, he still feels the guilt associated with them. He feels the guilt of not helping, but how can you help everyone? If you help one you must help many else it isn't fair. Life isn't fair though. It just isn't. Good people die and bad people prosper because that's the way the world turns around. I wonder what would happen if we spun the would backwards instead? Chaos, no doubt, but would it really be chaos? Or just different to what we see and know? If you walked through a door and you were suddenly in another universe surrounded by people that look exactly like us, except that they were crazy; foaming at the mouth and raving and lumbering around; who would be the crazy one? You're in their world and to them, you are the crazy one. Should this idea modify the way we talk and think and act socially? Maybe.

Imagine you were in the jungle and suddenly you were captured by some men. These men are cutting down the jungle for wood and they think you shouldn't be there. They take you back to their campsite and there are 10 natives in a make-shift cage. One of the man holds out a gun to you and tells you that you can go free if you shoot one of the natives in the cage. If you refuse to shoot the native then you may go, but they will all be killed instead of just one. Assume that the man is telling the truth, and that those you don't kill will be freed, what do you do? Do you take the gun, aim down the barrel and shoot, and have the blood on your hands? Or do you turn your back and walk away? Is this a question of responsibility or guilt or humanity? Do we have a responsibility to kill one to save many in this situation? Is your guilt important? Would you feel more guilty about killing one or letting many die? Do you deny yourself something when you take that gun and pull the trigger? Something so important that it makes up the very core of humanity? Or are these morals and ethics and guilty emotions all weakness?

Does it make you weak to walk away? Or strong? Some might say that it makes you weak because you cannot shoot one man to save many. Others might say that it makes you strong because you aren't taking the easy route out, but then again, what is the easy route?

I'm predicting that many of you will choose to shoot the one to save the rest. Am I right? That seems like the natural human reaction to a situation like this. You have the power to stop 10 people getting killed by killing one yourself. Do you really have that power? Or is it an illusion? Are you simply removing yourself from the equation if you walk away? Does that change anything? Would these people have died anyway if you hadn't come along to be given this choice?

Seeing as I guess many of you will still say that you would shoot rather than walk, now suppose this new scenario. You are the president of a large country - we'll say America. Now someone else, say Russia, contacts you and says that they will kill 50% of the American population with a nuclear missile. The only thing you can do to stop them is to kill 5% of your own people. What do you do? Let the Russians kill half your country or kill 5% of them yourself? I guess that makes it a lot harder, doesn't it? Lets just add in there that the Russians will have proof that you ordered the deaths of thousands of people and will leak it to the media, so there's no way you can pawn it off on another country. Do you shoulder the responsibility and risk revolt, hate, or even your own assassination by killing your own people or do you let the Russians do their thing? Just to clarify, we are talking about the same ratio of people living or dying in each scenario so, technically, your answers should be similar. Are they different?

Maybe they're different because as a normal person you think you could handle killing someone as long as you don't let all 10 people die, but you're scared that if your president of prime minister was in the same situation he might betray you and choose you to be one of the ones killed. Maybe you would prefer your president to kill off a smaller part of the population so you have more chance of surviving?

These are all very hard questions but interesting thinking. Killing one to save many is known as utilitarianism, the idea that we all must strive for 'the greater good'. I think the official line is 'the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people'. If someone or something gets in the way of the greater good then they are no consequence. It sounds like a good idea doesn't it? As many people as possible get to be happy and those that try to make us unhappy get eliminated. In theory, it is a good idea (like communism) but in reality it doesn't quite live up to expectations. What if you're a member of the side who don't agree with the majority? Don't you still want your voice to be heard? Don't you still want power to make a difference? The problem with utilitarianism is that you need someone to decide what the 'good' is, and how we should be 'happy', but everyone feels happiness differently and is gratified in different ways. How could one good be right for us all? The 'greatest number' might only be 51%, while there is 49% unhappy people. Maybe a true democracy would work, but true democracies hardly ever exist in the real world because it's simply too difficult to coordinate.

I feel like I should carry this on in some way but I need to shower and get ready to go out now so maybe another time. I'll see if I can dredge up any more ideas to think about for next time.

So long, So love.