View Poll Results: Kill 1 to save 1,000?

Voters
615. You may not vote on this poll
  • Kill 1; 1,000 live.

    451 73.33%
  • Don't kill 1; 1,000 die

    164 26.67%
Page 1 of 16
1
2
3
11
... LastLast
  1. #1

    Kill 1 to save 1,000?

    Hello everyone,

    I'm bringing up an age-old question for debate here: Is it right to "Kill 1 to save 1,000"?

    Personally, as much as I want to say yes, I really can't. I'm no authority or deity - so who am I to play God?

    It sounds like it would be a no-brainer to kill the 1, but I just have to hope I'll never be put in a situation where I have to make such a call.

    /discuss

  2. #2
    Who is the one and who is the 1,000? People are not inherently equal.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    Who is the one and who is the 1,000? People are not inherently equal.
    From a rational, objective standpoint, it shouldn't affect the decision whatsoever.

    That's where the human element comes into play, though. That's what makes the decision so hard.

  4. #4
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    380
    If it was 1 person i didn't know wich i needed to kill to save 1000 people i didn't know i wouldn't even think twice about it. If it was someone i knew well vs 1000 people i didn't know i would kick back and enjoy the massacre.

  5. #5
    The Patient Cheddabezze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    333
    Don't kill the 1 and let the 1000 die is my choice. The world is overpopulated as it is, seeing as you didn't give these people any relations to me specifically, I wouldn't care to see them go. Yeah, its sinister, don't care.

  6. #6
    Dreadlord Fuelled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    894
    Chose option two becuase, yes, you might find me sceptical and asshole-ish. But if we are to save this planet a bit more, it's a good idea to kill 999 extra people, prevents overpopulation a bit more.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Warwithin View Post
    From a rational, objective standpoint, it shouldn't affect the decision whatsoever.

    That's where the human element comes into play, though. That's what makes the decision so hard.
    It should and does affect the decision. Rationale does not come into play. You are asking a moral question but disalow moral reasoning


    Also this reminds me of the Nazi doctors of WW II. They did horrible horrible things to people but they did advanced medicine and we use their results today to save way more then they killed and tortured.

  8. #8
    Herald of the Titans Irisel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Swimming in a fish bowl
    Posts
    2,666
    No one will know how you will react in this awful situation, including yourself, until it happens.

    Rule of Thumb: If the healer's HPS is higher than your DPS, you're doing it wrong.

  9. #9
    Talking about overpopulation is pretty silly as its not really an issue in western countries compared to India or Africa.

    If you dont belong into a religion that says "don't kill" and you can think about the situation logically you would certainly kill the 1 person. If you think about the "authority to kill" majority of us eats meat where killing is necessity.
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueRet

    "This server shutdown was so epic not even Illidan was prepared for it"

  10. #10
    Might want to ask for an edit to say "Kill 1 innocent to save 1,000 innocents" because killing a man who is about to kill 1,000 innocent people is pretty much a no-brainer for most people.

    Assuming that, in most situations, probably. In the end, a dead person doesn't care how they died, they are just dead. To me, it wouldn't be killing 1 innocent person as much as it would be saving 1000 innocent people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warwithin View Post
    From a rational, objective standpoint, it shouldn't affect the decision whatsoever.

    That's where the human element comes into play, though. That's what makes the decision so hard.
    Actually, that's not true. If the 1 was a brilliant young scientist and the 1000 were old and dying, it would greatly swing the favor over to the 1 because he is more likely to create good in the world. He may well have more time left to live as all of the combined as well.
    Last edited by v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk; 2011-12-05 at 10:37 AM.

  11. #11
    depends. if the 1 is a terminally ill old man, who is completely lost to alzheimers, and the 1000 is fresh, young and innocent newborn children, THEN ITS A NO-BRAINER.

    dont kill the 1
    Quote Originally Posted by Davinfelth
    I'm a cow that casts green nature balls and turns into a bear cat tree owl and you are complaining about topography?

  12. #12
    ---------- Post added 2011-12-05 at 10:38 AM ----------

    [/COLOR]
    Quote Originally Posted by kazih View Post
    Talking about overpopulation is pretty silly as its not really an issue in western countries compared to India or Africa.

    If you dont belong into a religion that says "don't kill" and you can think about the situation logically you would certainly kill the 1 person. If you think about the "authority to kill" majority of us eats meat where killing is necessity.
    Ironically, if the world lived by US consumption standards it could only support at most 3 billion people, but if the world lived like China or India it could support over 13 billion. So while the population in western countries isn't as dense as other parts of the world their population is still just as stressful on resources.
    Last edited by Felfury; 2011-12-05 at 10:38 AM.
    One cannot simply quit wow his way into Mordor.

  13. #13
    Dreadlord Vynistra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Salem, OR
    Posts
    853
    Quote Originally Posted by shagra View Post
    depends. if the 1 is a terminally ill old man, who is completely lost to alzheimers, and the 1000 is fresh, young and innocent newborn children, THEN ITS A NO-BRAINER.

    dont kill the 1
    That was so not expecting as I was reading, but when I got to the end, I laughed. Heartily.

  14. #14
    If the one guy threatens my country, family, or my friends; I will kill him. Without even blinking.
    High Warlord , The proven Defender, Assilant, and Healer

  15. #15
    i'd kill a 1000 to save 1

  16. #16
    Scarab Lord Robinhoodexe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    4,188
    Depends... If i knew some of the 1000 people, I'd do it
    Congratulations on graduating to expert level trolling, I would stick around but I'm busy getting gay married in 13 states and performing roadside abortions while passing bills that take away people's guns while i sip superior european wine and cheese i bought with european style socialist money, arrivaderci!

  17. #17
    Stood in the Fire Ace Ventura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    373
    Quote Originally Posted by Elmot View Post
    If the one guy threatens my country, (...) I will kill him. Without even blinking.
    For your country? For a piece of land that was taken by ancestors?

    I don't get nationalism. Maybe when there's an alien attack I'll develop this 'eartlings unite!'-feeling, but... I don't care for my country one bit. It's a name and a flag, 5 km from here there's another country.

  18. #18
    It kind of depends.

    Is this one person responsible for the endangerment of the 1000 other people?
    Did he do something grievious like holding 1000 people captive, and threatening to blow them all up? In this case, definately yes.
    Did he make an error somehow, which caused 1000 people to be at risk, and is the only way to save them to kill the person? In this case, most likely no. Unless the error is so huge or unforgivable it really should never have occured. In that case, yes.
    Is there no link at all between the one person and the 1000, an entirely phylosophical arguement? Are all 1001 people "innocent" civilians? In that case, no. Sacrificing the few for the many may be the correct choice from a rational point of view, but it is not from a moral point of view.

  19. #19
    Pit Lord Wries's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    2,432
    Quote Originally Posted by lighteraser View Post
    i'd kill a 1000 to save 1
    This is how you can sum up the plot of Prison Break
    Obsidian 350D | Intel Core i7 2700K @ 4.8GHz | ASUS Maximus V Gene Z77 | 32GB RAM | Nvidia Geforce GTX 980 | 500GB SSD | LG 34" 21:9 34UM95-P

  20. #20
    Dreadlord Brettshock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    The Cloud District
    Posts
    983
    Depends. If the person is obviously going to kill 1,000 people, there is no chance they won't, and they fully intend to see the task through, then yes. If you can't 100% justify that they will truly do it, then no.

    Seeing as you'll most likely hit a grey area, I'd most likely go with yes. As said before, I'm not sure if I could in the situation, but the most rational process would be to eliminate the threat.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •