https://www.kidzsearch.com/questions/tag/%23theoretically Powered by Question2Answer https://www.kidzsearch.com/questions/883812/alright-i-got-a-philisophical-question-for-yall Lets say, theoretically, there is an orange cat. This orange cat leads a group of other cats, but the thing is, the cat leader makes rules against certain cats, like he really hates calicos, so he will say for example calicos are bad, and some other cats (not calico) fall for what he says and start hating calicos. Later, he says calicos are more dangerous than tabbies and starts sending cats loyal to him, mostly tabbies, after calicos for mostly no reason. He also does this a bunch more times, with a bunch more types of cats, and hurts and even sometimes kills cats, or leaves them strays.<br /> <br /> In theory, in this highly made up case, would it be justified or justifiable for one or many of the cats to rise up and kill him, for killing many others? If he would keep doing it, which the cats think he would, wouldn't that be saving many cats at the cost of one less than perfect one? Or would it be terrible, because the loss of life is always terrible?<br /> <br /> Highly theoretical btw<br /> <br /> Edit: Who flagged this? This is a long standing and well known philisophical debate already, I just used an example. And if people say yes, they are basing it off a theory called utilitarianism, the first systemic account created in 1789, but being used and promoted long before. Educate yourself Other https://www.kidzsearch.com/questions/883812/alright-i-got-a-philisophical-question-for-yall Thu, 12 Feb 2026 03:09:01 +0000