How would your "moral compass" guide you in this scenario?

Question

You are a resident of a European country which is under Nazi rule in WWII.
You have been given a choice by a Nazi army officer: shoot a resistance fighter and (you have been told that) eighty villagers standing behind you will spared the same fate.
What would you do?

Obviously there is a contingent of Nazi soldiers present and not just a Nazi officer...

And by shooting the resistance fighter, I do mean fatally wounding him...

By the way, if you shot the Nazi officer, there would be extremely grave consequences for the entire local population - that is the way these things worked.

Thanks to Nightserf for mentioning a book; I must confess, I didn't think this scenario up - it is a scene from "The Magus", an intriguing book by John Fowles.
The freedom fighter whispers "Freedom" ("eleuthera") to the man given the awful choice and in so doing reminds him that he does have a choice.

Answer 1

I'd try to shoot the Nazi officer, instead.

Answer 2

I'd shoot the Nazi army officer and then watch as the resistance fighter and then the entire village gets shot before I get slowly tortured to death.

OR

I shoot the resistance fighter and then the Nazi army officer still shoots the eighty villagers before shooting me.

OR

I shoot myself. Then I don't get to see the resistance fighter and the eighty villagers get shot.

OR

I run like a bunny and get shot in the back. Then I still miss out on the execution of villagers and resistance fighter.

OR

I make a deal and join the Nazi Army and help shoot the resistance fighter, and the eighty villagers, and I go on and live the rest of my life.

Answer 3

In a comic book world, once you get the gun, shoot the Nazi army officer and save yourself and the villagers. But there's probably other nazis there, too.

The question (in tv and films, at least) comes down to WHO you have to shoot. Usually turns out to be your girlfriend, who always looks like Sophia Loren or Catherine Zeta-Jones.

Some would say (as Spock loves to say) that shooting the one and saving the 80 is a good deal.

But then, there is something to be said for standing up to evil, no matter what the consequences. There have been cases in history (and unknown history) where the nobility and strength of those captured goes far beyond the threats of what the conquerors can do to them.

Case in point is the Spartan "300" who stood their ground against an impossible Persian Army. Was it their inner strength, was it their position on the land, was it their hatred of the Persians which gave them the desire, the ability, and the honor to fight them off so gigantically to halt the advance of such a gargantuan force?

Why do good and strong men and women VOLUNTEER to join the American Armed Forces and go to the Middle East to fight against the forces which seek to blow up and destroy even their own populations?

They all can't be fooled by 'King Bush' and his cronies. There's something that gives them determination and strength to go across and lose limb and even life in this fight. And it can't just be getting their college paid for afterwards.....

Answer 4

Shoot the Nazi officer. He cannot be trusted to follow through on his word. Create a chaotic situation that would catch the authorities off guard. At least it would give the villagers a chance to flee or take up arms as well as the resistance fighter to go on the offensive and call for reinforcements.

Answer 5

I would not shoot the Nazi officer because that would lead to everyone there, including myself, being mowed down in a hail of gunfire by the other Nazis that are surely around. That being said, since there is no mention of other Nazis around, if there weren't any, I'd kill the officer. Along those same lines, it doesn't say whether I have to kill the resistance fighter or not. It simply states I must shoot him/her. So, yes, you're damn right, I'd shoot him/her.

Answer 6

This is almost identical to the scenario in the opening scene of "Dominion," a prequel to the exorcist. When Father Merin implores a Nazi officer not to shoot ten villagers in retaliation for one of his men's death, the officer tells Merin to choose the ten or he will have his men massacre the entire village, man, woman, and child.

Merin chose the ten, and I would shoot the fighter, knowing that the fighter himself would be willing to die to spare the villagers. If released, I would then feel honor bound to replace the fighter in the resistance.

Answer 7

Amazing. Well I would try to understand what the 80 people think. Then I would make a choice. But I wouldn't shoot the Resistance Fighter anyway. Lots of people die everyday standing up for what they believe. It's quiet common but it's what we choose.

Answer 8

Shoot the Nazi. One less to worry about. Although then all those people would be killed and me as well.

I suppose shooting one soldier to spare 80 villagers makes the most logical sense (choosing the lesser of two evils, or choosing the greater good because more lives are spared.)

Answer 9

Shoot the Nazi.

There may be "grave consequences" for the others if I do that. However I am not repsonsible for the act of the Nazis even if they appear to be a consequence of my actions. The Nazis are responsible for their own acts, as I am for mine. I am repsonsible for what I do, that has to be the right thing, and killing a Nazi is always right.

Answer 10

I would shoot the resistance fighter, but only after the resistance fighter declares that he is dying for his cause. By being a resistance fighter, his priorities go beyond his own life, I need to give him time to voice that.

Answer 11

If there was only resistance fighter I'm sorry but I think I would kill him. 'cause you have ask the question is his life worth those eight people standing behind me.. And realistically he was gonna die anyway if he was standing there with a whole troop of Nazi soldiers.