would you push a button to save 10 guys but kill 1?

Question

would you push a fat man into a running train and kill him..to save 5 tied guys on the tracks from dying?

The alternative to the original pushing button question is that all 11 peopel die through your inaction of pushing the button.

furthermore...would you throw bombs from the air and kill 100'ds rather than kill 1 guy in an open battle with the odds in your favor but still not as safe as bombing people from a plane? (like by a factior of 5 or something)

7th answerer....the guy is fat becausehe stops the train by his sheer wait....say the guys tied to the tracks were like really well tied and there was not enough time to tie them off....would you run away or push the fat man infron of the train to stop it from running over the 5 guys? its 5 guys dead or 1

It would be very naughty of you...and treason---not good sportsmanship to push a guy behind his back...but then again...you would be saving 5 people..

tic toc

These are the decisions great men are faced...and then ordinary squable0bobs point fingers after they make the hard decision...

maybe if we started asking some pointed questions gay *** people would know WHY not to ask people why they made thigns after they did a hard decision...

like reporters, they ask the gayest questions...like, why did you decide to kill 1 guy to save 5, do you have the right to make that choice...bla bla bla...when their all bunch of ******* for example.

don't ask people AFTER the fact...you just look like a worm

unless you have a concrete answer or solution for what yo uwould do and allow others to criticize your peice of **** of a choice.

SMALL...ok, I'll make it your duty...

say your wife and kids will be lashed in the ***....not raped....just...lashed...and ...traumatized in a dungeon for 2 days....now you have some responsibility...you can't clean your hands, can you? without feeling some humiliation.......

so if you don't push the button, not only are you NOT saving 10 people, and NOT being responsible as a good citizen of society, but your also going to be humiliated as a man that can not even protect his own family...
so now your responsible, accountable, and therefore, assigned. will you let your kids suffer that humiliation and KILL 10 PEOPLE for your little comfort zone...or do you even have one anymore, small?

18th answerer ---

so...your not a moral person...so you would not make the decision even if there was a million people on one side you would save, just by killing 1...

I can change it so you will...you don't make a decision....then your family is raped or something...

And everyone knows you were given a choice...

so...now, you can go to the board with the button, and not push it or do anything...and then when you come back, and the 10 people are dead, you ahve to answer to the 10 people's families...or--if you don't even go or make a decion.... you have to answer to your raped family...

so--will you now push the button that makes you face only the 1 family and brings respect by most people?

all you got to do to make people into robots is incentive...just like nature...nature makes you its slave by putting pleasure/pain...checks and balances that tell you what to do....you have sex, beause it feels good...it is your duty, to preserve the existance of humans..so you

do nature's bidding...

jus so, if someone made you acountable, you would be forced to make a decision...because not to, would cost you more than if you didn't...

its that simple.

people would come back to say things like...you were given a choice...and you DIDN't PUSH THE BUTTOn...

the 10 families would probably try ti beat you or something...in the most meager case...in more extreme cases it might be even worse...

so, if people with guns on the street...chose YOU to make the decsion...and everyone saw it in the group you were in...

your accountable buddy...sorry.

This doesn't mean people...to be violent...it just means that...do not accuse people who take responsibility and then make a mistake...because by the answers I see...you would not make the best one either...

so just be compassionate of those that make the hard decisions instead of blaming them. You should feel empathy for those put in hard situations, not deride them. Ordinary people, who are put in hard decisions, should be admired, not blamed.

These decisions should be made by the experienced, wise, and generally accepted as intelligent...those you can probably be a little bit more accountable towards...

but in general, don't throw the first rock of blame, until you see the dificulties yourself...

Answer 1

Solution 1:

You assign each person a value based on their personal characteristics. For example, intelligence = 3, strength = 4, emotional stability = 3, obesity = -4, heart disease in family = -2, potential to find a cure for cancer = 25.

And another person might be: intelligence = 5, strength = 1, etc.

This points are assigned by taking an average value of the values defined for each characteristic, as provided by the people who will be influenced by the effects of the outcome.

Then compare the total point value associated with each action, and then make a decision.

Problem: By the time you make a decision, they'll all be dead.
Problem: There might be something about "ethics" involved.


Solution 2: Save the cuter guy! (If you're a girl). And kill the cuter guy if you are a guy. This eliminates competition for increasing your ability to breed and pass on your genes.

Answer 2

Yes I would push a button to divert a trolley from killing 10 people, even at the cost of one life.

No, I would not push someone off a bridge to save 5 people.

The BBC news website did a clear and concise version of these question a month or two ago to see what public opinion was. The final of the three questions was "you and 5 others are stuck in a cave that is filling with water and there is one small exit. The first to go out is the largest person and he gets stuck. Would you blow him up with dynamite if it meant everyone else would escape, or would drown if you did not?"

The common answers were "yes to the trolley diversion, No for the pushing off a bridge, and yes for the cave". In the first instance it is a simple numbers game, in the second it is difficult as you are very personally taking someone's life, in the third selfishness becomes a part as you would be among the dead for inaction.

Answer 3

It might depend on who the one bloke was, or the ten were, don't you think? All things being equal, I'd push the button. It's worth considering however whether the US President who ordered the atomic bombs to be dropped on Japan, on the grounds it would save lots of GI's, would have had the guts (?) to kill even one Japanese child or several personally and directly with a knife. In that particular case, just an organised demonstration would almost certainly have achieved the objective because Japan's will to war was failing fast - but the real motive was to impress Russia and the world what a big dangerous cowboy the US was. An expensive impression - similar to Israel's recent action on Lebanon perhaps?

Answer 4

Level one people, so long winded. Yeah, I was like you once, about less than a month ago. Since then I've had several sex changes, changed my race a few times, made one enemy and had to take away my "e-mail me option...." Now, if I pushed the button, and it had my fingerprint on it, and somehow I would be in the magical memory of the button so that the next person who pushed it would end up killing me because I touched it first, and then the person who pushed it after him would kill he who pushed it second, but then I would come back to life again because the pattern killed only every other person...wait, geez. What if pushing the button gave you an orgasm, would that help?

Answer 5

I don't have the right to push any button to kill anybody. However, I would try to save the once tied to the tracks and I hope those are not terrorists.

No, I would not throw a bomb and kill 100 of people either.

Okay, this is getting boring know. Have a good night sleep.

Answer 6

any day.

but then again I may not do it because of all the litigation.

A superhero would find a way to save them all. The superhero sits in his penthouse headquarters waiting the crisis beacon. The status quo isn't his concern, maintaining it is~

Not me. I don't have to give a shït if a burning bus of schoolchildren is on the tracks. There's nothing but harangue and headache in it for me. Humanity is over-rated.

Answer 7

I know what philosopher you're thinking of. John Stuart Mill. I would only agree to push someone off a bridge if there was water below, or if they were attached to a bungee cord. Tough question, though, isn't it? Someone could say they would, but if they were actually faced with it, they would most likely change their mind.

Answer 8

I wouldn't like the idea of killing one person, but if I wouldn't do that, I would basically kill 10 people. 10 lives are worth a lot more than 1 (well, it depends on the standards that rule your life though).

Answer 9

Jack, you think violence. You seem to glorify violence.You seem to revel in finding solutions to problems on Tit for Tat basis?

There have been , there are and there will be many alternatives to this violent approach. Please exhaust all of them and then , finally , you can fall back on this ... er... er.... button. Till then , Jack, THAT button is off limit for you.

You may ask what alternatives. Could be many many. You sacrifice yourself to save the 10. You plead .

Answer 10

Yes, majority always wins, we live in a democratical society so the majority always takes over any acts.