Yet Another Hypothetical

What would you do in this situation?


  • Total voters
    49
Lots of selfish people here.:rolleyes:

I would die so he/she could live on. Think, what if it's a 1 year old baby?
 
I'd understand if they would kill me in the same position, so I'd kill them. They're just being selfish if they object.
 
Well, in principle the only life that I have any sort of right to end is my own, so it would be wrong to choose the other person. In fact, if for some reason someone told me I had to choose out of a group of people which one would die, I would have to pick myself.

In practice, I will have to wait until I find myself in this exact situation.
 
Lots of selfish people here.:rolleyes:

I would die so he/she could live on. Think, what if it's a 1 year old baby?

Well, yes, people are generally selfish when it comes to preserving their own life. That's part of the reason why self-defense is considered justifiable, after all.
 
Well, yes, people are generally selfish when it comes to preserving their own life. That's part of the reason why self-defense is considered justifiable, after all.
Except this situation isn't you killing an attacker, it is you killing an innocent in order to save your own life, so it's not really self-defense. The same arguments may still apply, however.
 
Well, by living he (or she) is killing you, so it is self defence. Of course I would kill him (or her). I tend to dislike most people anyway, and hey, it helps stop overpopulation, greenhouse effect, and other kind of nasty things. For all I know, he or she is (or will be, or was) a serial killer. But even if it's the greatest man (or woman) on Earth, I'll kill him or her without doubt.
 
Well, by living he (or she) is killing you, so it is self defence. Of course I would kill him (or her). I tend to dislike most people anyway, and hey, it helps stop overpopulation, greenhouse effect, and other kind of nasty things. For all I know, he or she is (or will be, or was) a serial killer. But even if it's the greatest man (or woman) on Earth, I'll kill him or her without doubt.

How would it stop overpopulation if one of you have to go? And you're sure his death will help with the greenhouse effect more than yours would?

But, the fear of death will make just about anything justifiable. Even ending another's life I suppose.
 
In reality, it would take an extremely extreme situation to convince me that i *have* to kill the person to survive.

But since the hypothetical requires it, then yeah I'd kill them.

Face to face makes the decision easier for me: if it's a kid (< 15) and not terminally ill, I won't kill the person. If the person is old I won't hesitate. If I'm old I wouldn't kill the person (unless they are like 80 and I'm 70).

If the person is of some significance to the world I wouldn't kill the person unless they are a sufficiently large age.

Also important: if I'm young (i.e. < 35) I am willing to take full consequence for killing the person. Which I'm guessing would be MAX ~20 years in prison, less with good behavior. If I'm 50 and will have to face 20 years of jail time, I may not kill the person. I want to have some time to enjoy life after I face my penalties.
 
Well, you have to kill them face-to-face, but you still can't find out anything about who they are. You're wearing a special blindfold or something.

I am interested in that we haven't gotten many religious people in here. I wonder how the situation would stack up against things like "thou shall not kill".
 
How would it stop overpopulation if one of you have to go? And you're sure his death will help with the greenhouse effect more than yours would?

But, the fear of death will make just about anything justifiable. Even ending another's life I suppose.

That was just joking.
 
I'd do whatever I thought would most spite the person who set up this situation.

Failing that, I'd procrastinate and die, according to the last sentence of the OP.
 
I think it would really depend on the details.

I mean if some guy calmly told you that you had to kill someone or die and gave you a rusty spoon to do it with it would be very difficult. On the other hand it would be much easier if you were given a gun with one bullet and told to kill a guy tied to chair while a dozen men with machine guns were ready to shoot you if you refused.

But I have no idea what I would do.
 
Lots of selfish people here.:rolleyes:

I would die so he/she could live on. Think, what if it's a 1 year old baby?

It is debatable whether a 1-year old is a person, so that would actually make it easier.
---
From a utilitarian standpoint I'd probably have to take the nonviolent solution myself.

I am interested in that we haven't gotten many religious people in here. I wonder how the situation would stack up against things like "thou shall not kill".

Suicide sends you directly to hell whereas any [other] crime, no matter how heinous, can be forgiven. From a pure self-interest standpoint (usually implied by belief in hell in the first place), the choice is simple.

Well, by living he (or she) is killing you, so it is self defence.

This is absurd. If you need a heart transplant, does that mean it is "self defense" to kill someone and harvest their organs?
 
I conclude that who ever arranged this probably did so to make me hate myself if I chose to kill the other person. Probably a close relative or friend, or the love of my life.
 
Back
Top Bottom