View Poll Results: What would you do in this scenario?

Voters
337. You may not vote on this poll
  • Save beloved person.

    269 79.82%
  • Save the 100 unknown people.

    56 16.62%
  • Not do anything even though by inaction you're killing all.

    12 3.56%

Thread: Moral choice

Page 1 of 16
1
2
3
11
... LastLast
  1. #1
    Elemental Lord Snowraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    European Union
    Posts
    8,914

    Moral choice

    You are in a scenario by accident.

    However, your most loved person in the world (be it mate, family member or friend) is in danger. But so are 100 unknown people.

    You can save your loved person... but the 100 die. On the other hand, you can save the 100 people, but your beloved dies.

    You can't save both.

    It is a race of time, so if you don't act in 5 minutes, everyone dies. And it's your fault, because you could have saved some of them. Yet you chose to help none by inaction, thus killing all.


    Do you?
    1. Saved beloved person.
    2. Save the 100 people.
    3. Don't do anything thus condemning all 101 people to die.

  2. #2
    What's the scenario?
    "More booze, more bullshit, more buttfuckin'" "Sure, the 3 B's"
    On Parole from Retard Rehabilitation since August 11, 2014.
    Quote Originally Posted by Helden View Post
    Tradewind isn't helping.

  3. #3
    Epic! Tokru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The end of the rainbow
    Posts
    1,740
    1. without even thinking about it.

  4. #4
    Scarab Lord Maxilian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Dominican Republic
    Posts
    4,713
    These sound like Infamous.... but whatever, i know that in that case i would save the person i love

  5. #5
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Out and about
    Posts
    407
    Number one.

    Quote Originally Posted by maxilian View Post
    These sound like Infamous.... but whatever, i know that in that case i would save the person i love
    Damn you, Kessler!

  6. #6
    I am Murloc! Tiili's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    5,404
    Would save the one I love.
    Close your eyes and smile.
    [15:53] <PizzaSHARK> you have such a cute accent! ^_^

  7. #7
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    It could be 1 billion people for all I care. I'm saving my wife. Without even thinking.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  8. #8
    Beat destiny and kill myself.
    There will be no survivors.

  9. #9
    Bloodsail Admiral
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,186
    This is rather simplistic, save the person you care about.

    it gets more interesting if you introduce passive and active options, such as having to actively divert a train away from the single person onto another track with 100people on it.
    From that example everyone is going to die anyway, so its a choice who you save, you are not actively putting anyone in danger to save someone else, so there is no moral choice really, just personal choice on who you take action to save.
    No game will ever kill wow. Though Blizard themselves are making a pretty damm good attempt lately.

    THE FIRST RULE OF BRAWLERS GUILD IS YOU DO NOT GET INVITED TO BRAWLERS GUILD.

  10. #10
    With all the terrible people and idiots I've met, I'm almost tempted to say I'd let them die even if I could save both.

  11. #11
    Mechagnome Herbert West's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Arkham, Miscatonic University
    Posts
    727
    Let's say so, I'd gladly condemn 100 people, if I could do so with impunity, even if my beloved's life wasn't at stake =)
    To life, to life I'll bring them,
    I'll bring all these dead men to life!

    To life, to life I bring them,
    With one small injection, LIKE THIS!

  12. #12
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Herbert West View Post
    Let's say so, I'd gladly condemn 100 people, if I could do so with impunity, even if my beloved's life wasn't at stake =)
    I think this is what called a "red flag."
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  13. #13
    Elemental Lord Snowraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    European Union
    Posts
    8,914
    Quote Originally Posted by TradewindNQ View Post
    What's the scenario?
    The scenario is saving one group or your loved one or doing nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by tlacoatl View Post
    This is rather simplistic, save the person you care about.

    it gets more interesting if you introduce passive and active options, such as having to actively divert a train away from the single person onto another track with 100people on it.
    From that example everyone is going to die anyway, so its a choice who you save, you are not actively putting anyone in danger to save someone else, so there is no moral choice really, just personal choice on who you take action to save.
    But you do have the choice, you know that both groups will die, so by going to save one group, you're killing the others indirectly.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    I think this is what called a "red flag."
    The threat of murder investigations and retaliation is a much greater threat to many than the moral implications of killing someone.

  15. #15
    The Lightbringer Deadvolcanoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    3,599
    Quote Originally Posted by Hiricine View Post
    The threat of murder investigations and retaliation is a much greater threat to many than the moral implications of killing someone.
    So deep down all of us want to kill people, but we choose not to because we might be investigated? I don't think that's accurate.
    It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

  16. #16
    The Lightbringer JfmC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Antwerp City
    Posts
    3,526
    So the 100 people are unknown? But can't that group of unknown people contain people you know and love, because you don't know who is in the group? Or are they simply 100 people you have never met before?

    Also, can you see the 100 people? Because if I could see them I would save them, if I couldn't see them then I would be saving my loved one.
    Thread:Will we ever create A.I?
    So I just watched Her and it gave me a deep thought. Will man ever create an artificial consciousness or is it impossible. Anyone have any ideas?
    Quote Originally Posted by det View Post
    We are currently creating "A.S" - artificial stupidity. A.K.A internet forums

  17. #17
    Bloodsail Admiral
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,186
    Quote Originally Posted by Arnorei View Post
    The scenario is saving one group or your loved one or doing nothing.



    But you do have the choice, you know that both groups will die, so by going to save one group, you're killing the others indirectly.

    No, if you do nothing you they all die, so you can only take positive action, in which case its personal choice, you are not actively putting the majority in danger, just not taking action to remove them from it.

    There are quite a few complex questions that can be done with this kind of dilema, and generally people have no issue with letting people already in danger die, or letting people who have actively put themselves in danger die, if they choose to save someone else. But people generally have an issue where they woudl actively put someone in danger who was not already in danger, hence the train tracks dilema is a good one as it requires active choice over which tracks the train travels down.

    How about this:
    You are standing on a bridge when you notice 10 people on the tracks ahead of you, with a train approaching from the other side of the bridge, the driver cannot see the people on the tracks and will run them over if nothing is done to alter the situation. You notice a person next to you on the side of the bridge, pushing them onto the tracks ahead of the train will cause the train to stop with only that person killed, thereby saving 10 other people, do you push the person?

    Then ask yourself this:
    You see a train heading towards 10people tied to the train tracks, the train will not stop and will kill them, however you notice that there is a siding before the train woudl hit the people, where there is one person tied to the tracks, if you divert the train it will hit just one person on the tracks instead of the 10. Do you divert the train?

    If you ask yes to the second, and no to the first, ask youself what the difference is.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs0E69krO_Q
    Last edited by tlacoatl; 2013-01-25 at 07:47 PM.
    No game will ever kill wow. Though Blizard themselves are making a pretty damm good attempt lately.

    THE FIRST RULE OF BRAWLERS GUILD IS YOU DO NOT GET INVITED TO BRAWLERS GUILD.

  18. #18
    The Unstoppable Force Aeluron Lightsong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Jaina Proudmoore's side. Always and forever.
    Posts
    22,844
    This question is vague. If I could save both and end up myself being gone I would. Of course if I'm very happy and lived a good life which I have not yet.
    Blizzard do not destroy Jaina Proudmoore's character. Make her who she once was, not full of rage and vengeance.,If you are curious about me or about my writing aspirations, feel free to pst me. Paladin-Sorcerer at your service! http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...htsongg/simple https://twitter.com/Aeluron1989

  19. #19
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    428
    I'm pretty sure we've had quite a few threads on exact this issue in the past already.

  20. #20
    Epic! Tokru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The end of the rainbow
    Posts
    1,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Deadvolcanoes View Post
    So deep down all of us want to kill people, but we choose not to because we might be investigated? I don't think that's accurate.
    I think that's very accurate.

    Just look what happens when things like big black outs happen (or likewise other incidents that reduce the possibility of getting cought). Pillaging immediately starts. If law enforcement would completely stop for some reason you can except a drastic rise in murders.

Posting Permissions

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