I'm not sure I understand the question. Is it how many people would have to die for you to be willing to take their place? Or how much carnage you'd want this fellow to inflict?
I think you're missing two very valid choices in the former case: 1 and 2. I would let one random person die instead of me, but probably not two.
If I had the luxury of doing so, I'd calculate the ages and mean life expectancy of the potential targets, figuring it was fairest to minimize the number of years lost. Of course one might want to factor in family, whether potential victims supported spouses or children, that sort of thing...
Of course this is all assuming I could be as rational and noble as I'd like. I think very few people can be sure what they'd do in the real world when faced with death as a reality instead of a hypothetical. (And this situations is of course very hypothetical-- in the real world I would try to reason with this fellow, or fight him/her, or assess their ability to actually kill multiple people...)
right, but i think it's an interesting exercise to see just what you'd be willing to do thinking about it with a calm state of mind. since it's a random selection, you have no way of knowing what age, state of health, family situation, location, etc. it'd be very unlikely, but it could be that everyone who died in your stead would be among your closest friends/relatives.
i hit 1000 and decided i just couldn't rationalize that may people. although, i'm not sure where i'd stop between 100 and 1000...
What sort of random number generator are they using to pick the other people? Would it be instantly, or would I have time to do something before they go off on their globe-hopping murder spree? Am I thinking about this question way too much?
i don't think you're thinking about it as much as brian, but consider the action based on your response to be immediate. if you say you, you're dead. if you say 1000000 others, they're dead. there's no time to warn people.
Comments 9
Reply
I think you're missing two very valid choices in the former case: 1 and 2. I would let one random person die instead of me, but probably not two.
Reply
the idea though is how many people would you be willing to sacrifice before sacrificing yourself.
Reply
If I had the luxury of doing so, I'd calculate the ages and mean life expectancy of the potential targets, figuring it was fairest to minimize the number of years lost. Of course one might want to factor in family, whether potential victims supported spouses or children, that sort of thing...
Of course this is all assuming I could be as rational and noble as I'd like. I think very few people can be sure what they'd do in the real world when faced with death as a reality instead of a hypothetical. (And this situations is of course very hypothetical-- in the real world I would try to reason with this fellow, or fight him/her, or assess their ability to actually kill multiple people...)
Reply
i hit 1000 and decided i just couldn't rationalize that may people. although, i'm not sure where i'd stop between 100 and 1000...
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment