2006-12-27 10:32:16 · 17 answers · asked by jackslackers 1 in Social Science ➔ Psychology
Jesus did
2006-12-27 12:38:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think this question is very interesting because it is indicative of your attempt to uncover just how selfish mankind has a tendency to be.
I think those of you who say you'd die in a second may not be fully appreciating what you are saying. You are saying essentially that you'd save 100 milltion random people and leave your family and those you love behind when you don't even know which 100 million people would be saved. If we hypothesized this a little more we could ask, "Would you die so that 100 million terminally ill people would continue to live (eventually their illnesses would kill them anyway because nobody lives forever) or so that 100 very elderly people could live (they could die at any minute)?" Think about if you'd truly want to sacrifice yourself for them...On the other hand if it's for 100 million babies or 100 million healthy, well adjusted people who are highly functional I bet you'd be more readily willing to do it, right???
Ultimately it's not a fair queston to those who hold their own lives about the lives of others or to the humanitarians because there's always a way of putting a new spin on that question....
2006-12-27 11:39:16 · answer #2 · answered by Cute But Evil 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In the context of your question, no.
You suggest that my death could/might save 100 million lives implies that at that point, that when I decide to live, 100 million will die.
If your question were to NOT contain the word could, then I would only need to know who's lives we are talking about to make the first part of my decision.
The second part of my decision, would be in what manner I would be killed, and whether I had a choice of method.
In a singular, correct construction of this hypothetical question as it would apply to me, would offer a 'yes' I would; all other instances would generate a 'no'.
2006-12-27 11:01:10 · answer #3 · answered by curly bob 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No question about it, how could my life be more important than 100 million people.
2006-12-27 10:41:21 · answer #4 · answered by Day 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Honestly, no. But it would depend on those 100 million lives, if it was my loved ones, i would do it in a heartbeat. But for some strangers nope!
2006-12-27 10:40:10 · answer #5 · answered by Andy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obviously. I mean I am one person with nobody in this world. People amongst them have spouses, children, loved ones, relatives, friends. Who am I to deny one hundred million people that right so I can live my miserable existence?
2006-12-27 10:42:53 · answer #6 · answered by EbonyRose 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
absolutely. my god, anyone who would sacrifice 100 million lives to save their own hide is pathetic. we have seen far less heroism that is equally commendable. cool question, but 100 million is a no brainer.
2006-12-27 10:36:15 · answer #7 · answered by sfpd 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldnt hesitate to sacrifice myself for that aount of ppl- no doubt.
In the end- i or whoever else would do such a thing would be greatly rewarded with remembrance and an icon of legends
2006-12-27 13:42:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends on who the one million people are.
2006-12-27 10:39:28 · answer #9 · answered by Nelly 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
absolutely. i have nothing to fear in death. not that i would just willingly jump up and volunteer but if i were told that it was me or 100 million people... i would sacrifice myself... unless they were all terrorists and politicians... then i may save myself.
2006-12-27 10:43:05 · answer #10 · answered by somebody's a mom!! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only if my children were part off the hundred million.
2006-12-27 17:21:07 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋