Hypothetical choice

[Authary]

Correct. When I said dictator I didn't mean "evil overlord" but rather "supreme leader". You're still you, you just have absolute power.

And before the question pops, no, you can't kick the military leader and then resign yourself and have someone else better in charge.

That absolute power kinda sucks.

[Kurioxan]

Hmmmm....

The end doesn't justify the means, but it sure as hell is a good incentive i guess.

You would be surprised by the amount of people you would get, if you just... asked.
There is no need to force anyone.
Volunteers, terminally ill patients, people who have no prospect in life, people who are considering suicide anyway, you would get likely far more than 10.000.

Make a public announcement, tell everyone what you need, who you need and what they will expect, and what will be the result of their sacrifice, appeal to their sense of unity, humanity, empathy, duty and wanting to do something that is worth it, that changes the world, a lot would show up.

[ryotte]

If I had to pick, the criminals. Particularly ones on death row (assuming this country has the death penalty), since they're sentenced to death anyway. Recently, a man executed for raping and killing two girls (I think they were 11 and 13) said as his last words that it seemed like a waste to kill him (beside the point here, but wasn't it a waste for him to kill those girls too?). Well, I guess this way he -and his type- wouldn't be a waste.

[Deleted]

I don't get it, why would anyone not pick the prisoners? They're criminals who have seriously injured other people and they're more of a burden on society than the elders and cripples. I'm picking them and sleeping a good nights sleep afterwards.

[Kurioxan]

I don't get it, why would anyone not pick the prisoners? They're criminals who have seriously injured other people and they're more of a burden on society than the elders and cripples. I'm picking them and sleeping a good nights sleep afterwards.

Because in most cases the said criminals are not "monsters" but humans taken to limits where they saw no other way out than crime, or were not given any outlet.
Dont be too fast to judge.
Few exceptions, in case of psychopaths, but even those end up getting outlets, joining the army, paramedics, business and so forth.

You actions are in many cases a reaction to the circumstances, not a definition of who you are

[SirRobin]

I would skip all those options, loot the treasury, grab some girlfriends, and move to the Caribbean.

[PACOX]

Why not the willing? Many would sign up. Why is a cure killing people?

[bekilrwale]

The criminals no problem. The people who commit such acts are no better than animals, and I have nothing wrong with animal testing.

[Iyotanka]

Why isn't there a choice of getting volunteers from the population? I'm sure there are plenty of people in tough places in life. Either they're alone and wouldn't mind living a life of luxury for a while in exchange for dying for science (à la Joe Vs. the Volcano) or maybe people who lost someone to cancer and wouldn't mind the sacrifice. Or even people who have no means to provide for their families and you can keep their families comfortable for the sacrifice. It may take longer to perfect the treatment but it would be better in my opinion.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

I'd take 10,000 criminals who willingly volunteer to be test subjects in return for having their death sentences commuted.

Something like this.

[caractacus]

It does worry me on this forum (and not just in this thread but in many others) how so many people seem to categorise criminals as an entirely different race of people afforded a completely different standard of rights compared to the rest of humanity. Lets not even talk about all the wrongly criminalised people throughout the world. It only takes an unfortunate set of circumstance and any one of us can become a criminal. People are criminalised because they accidently injure someone else, or because they choose to stand up for something they believe is right or simply because they don't understand the delicate intricacies of the Law.

[Deleted]

Ok, I haven't read all the responses but given the choice then I would not even choose the criminals or the cripples who serve no purpose to society the so called "leeches". All human life is precious in my opinion (this is from a non-religious perspective) and we don't have a right to end their lives and change the natural course of events. Admittedly we will be saving more lives by finding a cure but at what cost?

I don't think we have any right to intervene in this way.


Also, the criminals were not born criminals and their soul was like a blank canvas at birth, so whether it was predisposition to have a criminal mind or the way they were raised that made them criminals is what concerns me.

[Deleted]

Tricky scenario here, reminds me of this quotation:

Evil, be thou my good! - Satan, Paradise Lost Book IV.

Why isn't there a choice of getting volunteers from the population? I'm sure there are plenty of people in tough places in life. Either they're alone and wouldn't mind living a life of luxury for a while in exchange for dying for science (à la Joe Vs. the Volcano) or maybe people who lost someone to cancer and wouldn't mind the sacrifice. Or even people who have no means to provide for their families and you can keep their families comfortable for the sacrifice. It may take longer to perfect the treatment but it would be better in my opinion.

I'd probably go along with this "willing sacrifice" argument, but then where does that end? Supposing more scenarios and cures are thought up - what if we run short of willing sacrifices, assuming there were enough in the first place?

[krunksmash]

do the drime do the time. they arnt getting out of jail and they made there victims suffer so atleast the victims deaths wont be in vain.

[Waaldo]

I would pick the criminals even if there was a 1% chance of these scientists finding a cure. If it were up to me all of these criminals would have bullets put in their heads, so why not use them for some testing instead?

[Windfury]

It does worry me on this forum (and not just in this thread but in many others) how so many people seem to categorise criminals as an entirely different race of people afforded a completely different standard of rights compared to the rest of humanity. Lets not even talk about all the wrongly criminalised people throughout the world. It only takes an unfortunate set of circumstance and any one of us can become a criminal. People are criminalised because they accidently injure someone else, or because they choose to stand up for something they believe is right or simply because they don't understand the delicate intricacies of the Law.

Don't forget the vast majority of people who do this are doing so while happily illegally downloading whatever ('criminals are people who get caught breaking different laws to the laws I routinely break').

The answer to the question has to be to either take volunteers (why isn't that an option?) or not go ahead with it. Every other option is a violation of fundamental human rights, and protecting human rights is central to protecting freedoms and justice in society. Abandoning rights in the name of something positive (curing cancer) is still abandoning rights, which is ultimately a negative for everyone.

[Spoiler]

The problem with choosing number 1 is that you are not merely killing criminals, but you would be in essence torturing them as they would "die for sure in horrible pains." Due to this fact, I would resign to not killing anyone because subjecting anyone to horrible pain against their will is unjustifiable and inhumane, even for the worst of criminals.

[namelessone]

I understand that it's hypothetical, but it's so far removed from any real scenario that I don't see what it's meant to prove.

[Deleted]

Because in most cases the said criminals are not "monsters" but humans taken to limits where they saw no other way out than crime, or were not given any outlet.
Dont be too fast to judge.
Few exceptions, in case of psychopaths, but even those end up getting outlets, joining the army, paramedics, business and so forth.

You actions are in many cases a reaction to the circumstances, not a definition of who you are

So... mass rapists and child molesters are humans taken to the limits? I think they're sick people, and sick not like in diseased, but sick as in insane.
And fanatical killers? They're everywhere! Killing because of religion taken to extreme, hatred to other cultures and races taken to extreme, hatred towards immigrants taken to extreme, hatred towards foreign powers taken to extreme etc.

Why not the willing? Many would sign up. Why is a cure killing people?

Once again, because that would be the easy way out. This is a scenario to see how far would people go to help a majority oppressing a minority. If there was a case with volunteers on death sentences with terminal diseases, everyone would have picked that since neither, nor the majority, nor the minority has to suffer, these people volunteer. So in this case you either pick the minority, not doing anything and being passive and letting everyone with cancer die, or you pick the majority by running trials on 10.000 people.

And after you decide on which side you'd go, you then decide how far would you go? would you take random people to not hate on a random group? would you take those that already broke laws as crazy? would you take people from another country so that your people wouldn't hurt or would you get rid of the crippled and poor to no longer burden your society?

It does worry me on this forum (and not just in this thread but in many others) how so many people seem to categorise criminals as an entirely different race of people afforded a completely different standard of rights compared to the rest of humanity. Lets not even talk about all the wrongly criminalised people throughout the world. It only takes an unfortunate set of circumstance and any one of us can become a criminal. People are criminalised because they accidently injure someone else, or because they choose to stand up for something they believe is right or simply because they don't understand the delicate intricacies of the Law.

In this scenario the criminals are 100% guilty. Because it's not real life. I even wrote that in OP!
And I doubt someone would become a serial killer, a mass rapist or a mass child molester by circumstance...

Don't forget the vast majority of people who do this are doing so while happily illegally downloading whatever ('criminals are people who get caught breaking different laws to the laws I routinely break').

So... you're comparing mass murderers, serial killers, mass rapists, mass child molesters to... people who download stuff illegally? ok...

[gneugen]

So... mass rapists and child molesters are humans taken to the limits? I think they're sick people, and sick not like in diseased, but sick as in insane.
And fanatical killers? They're everywhere! Killing because of religion taken to extreme, hatred to other cultures and races taken to extreme, hatred towards immigrants taken to extreme, hatred towards foreign powers taken to extreme etc.

The contradiction of calling these criminals 'insane' while in the same poll claiming you would kill 10,000 people willingly is literally blowing my mind.