The story above is of four people who were stranded at sea and survival techniques which they used in order to survive until they were found. One of the four, Parker, ended up in a coma and after several days at sea Dudley killed Parker so the other three had food to survive by.
Is what Dudley did defensible? In my opinion, I would say that in this case it is defensible. With Parker being in a coma and no help obviously on the way, the odds were not good that Parker would survive. With that being the case, the greater good in this case would be for the other three who were not yet in a coma to take the appropriate measures to try and save themselves.
I can not think of many situations where murder is defensible. Obviously, if you or a loved one are being threatened with being murdered and need to protect yourself I find that defensible. I don’t believe in the death penalty or abortion because I believe those are murder and not defensible. But I think this may be the only exception other than self defense which I would consider defensible.
Obviously, the courts did not agree as Dudley was found guilty when he was tried after being rescued. Ironically, he was sentenced to the death penalty.
Had I been in that same situation I’m not sure what I would of done. It’s easy sitting here on the couch where I have lots of food in the kitchen to say I would not of taken the same action. But it would be a whole different story if I was stranded at sea and desperate for any possible way to save myself and make it back to the ones I loved.
I am sure many of the people in previous situations where they had to resort to cannibalism to survive never would of pictured themselves going that far to save themselves. But when desperation takes over we never know what we are capable of doing.
What would you have done in that situation? Do you think his actions were defensible?