Kill 1 to save 1,000?

[Slashbubblehearth]

The needs of many always outweigh the needs of one. No life has higher value than another and with that said, the choices can be remade.

Kill 1,000 to protect one.
Kill one to protect 1,000.

[Deleted]

I didn't vote.

There are just too many factors like previously mentioned above for me to say yes/no to a question like that. :|

[Deleted]

It's quite scary that a lot of people here disregard concepts like

right
responsibility
guilt
circumstance
etc.

I reject a purely circumstantial morality, it doesn't do a good balance between the interests of the collective and the interests of the individual.

I mean I'm assuming that this one person:

- is probably not among those 1000 that are going to die
- is not ABOUT to die (terminal illness, vegetable on life support etc.)
- is not responsible for the death of those 1000
- does not have any obligation to save ANY of those 1000 people
- does not have other past crimes that could void his right to live

So I disagree.


Now LETTING someone die to save 1000 people might be different. But KILLING an innocent person to save 1000 - NO! I wouldn't want to be that one person and I'm sure you wouldn't either.

[schwarzkopf]

I can't stand the saying "playing god". You are playing god no matter what answer you choose. It is up to you to either kill 1, or kill 1000. Whether or not you want to believe it, the choice is yours.

Actually - in all these scenarios if you are choosing which to kill, then doing nothing would kill no-one and therefore be the correct choice.

e.g If pressing the yellow button kills 1 person and pressing the green button kills 1000 - which button would you press ? Answer : Neither

The fact is that all these scenarios involve the choice between you killing X and someone/something else killing Y.

e.g. Pressing the green button will kill 1 person, not pressing the green button will kill 1000

In this situation - someone/something else is responsible for the deaths if you do nothing, you would only be responsible for the 1 death if you act.

So don't get this wrong - this is a choice about you doing something wrong to right someone else's wrong (not your own).

[Maia]

Okay. One adult man vs a thousand women and children... takes no thought to answer.

If they were all adults of same gender... that's a much deeper question. Probably *not* kill the one, for the reasons Thunderaan above mentioned.

[Deleted]

As many have said it depends on who the 1 is. If its 1 person you love for 1000 people you don't even know, then its a far harder question. And it depends on how the deaths work. Would the 1 be tortured to death whilst the 1000 were gassed in their sleep? Questions breed Questions. Queseption

[Deleted]

If the "1" is a family member then no, if it's a stranger, dont care if it's a president or something then yes.

[Polarthief]

Assuming all of the following to be true:

Neither the 1 nor the 1,000 are ANYONE that I know.

None of the 1,001 people are anyone of extreme significance. They are just your average joes that only their families/friends would miss. Also, none of these people would ever BECOME significant to the world in their futures.

They are all of average adult age and average health. We're not talking killing one terminally diseased 99 year old vs killing off 1000 middle-aged, perfectly healthy, adults (that would make the choice too obvious).

None of them lead a life of crime or debauchery. They all have an average lifestyle, AKA: "The Norm".


Assuming all the above to be true, I would let the 1 live for a few reasons:

1. I wouldn't actually KILL anyone, even if 1000 people die from this one person living. It's an indirect cause/effect that didn't really turn me into a murderer.

2. Overpopulation is a bitch at the moment. Obviously I wish we could kill off a few of the stupid people in the thousand, but since I'm assuming every one of them to be average, whatever. At least it does help overpopulation. (PS: By stupid people I am referring to assholes, petty criminals, rapists, and other people that do really REALLY stupid things in their lives. It doesn't mean "lesser intelligence" in this case)

3. Killing 1 person is a crime and brands you a murderer. Killing a thousand people (even indirectly) is like a conqueror or something. I wouldn't mind being "Conqueror Michael" (OMG I GAVE PEOPLE MY FIRST NAME! lololololol)



Also, on an unrelated note, to the person above me: If you ever read this, your signature is incorrect. The right answer(s) is(are) DKs, Fury Warriors, and Retadins.

[Glomp]

Depends if any of those people are in my monkeysphere.

[Exodus1811]

Batman would save everyone.

[razski]

Depends on perspective. If you see people as a parasite, it would be easy to sacrifice 1000. World is vastly overpopulated as it is!

On the other hand, if it was 1000 people I knew and cared for, then I'd go the opposite route.

[RicardoZ]

I'd like to believe that if 1'001 people put their heads together they could find a way to solve the problem so that nobody had to die.

[tanksin the enhance shamy]

points to the dark knight where the batman kinda doesnt save everyone..

to save someone i love id kill a thousend to protect a random thousend id end myself contradiction i know but situationally thatd be how i chose

[Deleted]

Kill noone and save 1001!

[Isrozzis]

In a machiavellian sense, the ends for that case would justify the means.

Though you have a rather black-white situation, since there is no context as to the situation of these 1000 people. If it was say, let your sibling die to save 1000 inmates, I would think the answers would be quite different. Though as it is now, yes.

[Easo]

Fall in love with a girl, then think if that 1 person was that girl. Would you kill her to save 1000 people who could give two shits about you? . Thousands of people die every day. Bad luck.

Yes. If the person was me, then 9g to my brains. You will probably not believe me...

[Nonfoxx]

Depends who it is, if the 1000 people were a mix of family, friends and random people I don't know and the 1 person was someone of my immediate family then I'd have to kill the 1. If they were all people I had never met, I'd kill the 1. This question is so vague it is hard to give a definate answer for

[Bluesparks75]

It depends on the 1 or the 1000.

Would I kill Stephen Hawking to save 1000 people standing outside a welfare line with gold teeth and sneakers with lights in them? No.

[krymefighter]

I can't see the reasoning behind killing thousands in order to not kill one.

[Darkdruidelf]

Do I get to pick who I kill? If so, fuck yeah. I'd either kill someone I really hate, or pick someone who is going to die really really soon anyways.