I am interested to know which people would choose?
Given the choice between a bag of money containing $50 million or a bus full of people… Which would you choose?
If you choose the money, the bus full of people will disappear. That is to say the people inside, who are all ordinary people, will die. They are also the only people who would ever know, so you will never be held accountable for their deaths. But you will be able to keep all the money, no questions asked.
If you choose the bus of people, you will not get the money. The people will all live and will know that you chose their lives over the money, surely thanking you for it…
With fifty mil, I could save more than a busload of people. I would choose the money. If you truly care about helping people you would choose the one that allows you to help the most.
This is a no-brainer for me, I’d choose the people. And not because I’d have their undying gratitude. That $50mil isn’t magically appearing from nowhere, right? Someone somewhere has that $50mil, and they could choose to do something good with it. But the minute they give it to me - in effect, to kill people - that makes me the equivalent to a paid assassin. No thanks. Whether anyone else ever knew or not, I’d know. It wouldn’t matter what I did with the money if I had to kill people to get it.
Yea you could look at it that way but the thought is not complete, if you do not take the fifty mil from that sadistic person he/she will just offer it to another human until someone takes it. The person that takes it probably won’t choose to help others stay alive. Oh they may give some to charities to salve their guilt, but they won’t actually be keeping people alive. In this scenario, someone dies some how. It is the choice of quantity. Do you allow 60 people to die in order to save thousands? Or do you save sixty people and allow thousands to die?
That is how I view these types of questions I have very little faith in humans, I have a lot of faith in greed. I know that greed of money and power changes good people into selfish ones. If you put that 50 mill carrot out there you will get greed. I would rather prevent that so that I can save the innocent.
What are you talking about? You aren’t killing anyone, you’re simply allowing them to die. I hate to tell you this, but we do that every day, and it’s a hell of a lot more than a busload. Look at the thousands who die everyday in this squabble or that one. All die needlessly in interminable warfare, through starvation, lack of medical care, and we sit here in front of our computers sipping a latte (skim, no whipcream). We wring our hands and tsk-tsk and wail about how terrible things must be in Darfur, Myanmar, or wherever the media points our heads.
Anita, you ARE a paid assassin. So are the rest of us. Take the frigging money. Give 10% of it to some save-the-children foundation, and use the rest in stock speculation in companies supplying the military. Salve your conscience and invest in the future!
Ok see Anita, What did I tell you? You turned down the money and the person behind you took it, that person is only giving 10% to some charity that will only really use 1% of that money to do any actual good, the rest goes into the pockets of the corporate leaders of that charity.
He justified his greed well did he not? And this guy is an actul loveable nice guy. Ummmm mostly.
But at some point it becomes a lifeboat where the choice is between one and many (which this scenario is not no matter how many people you could save with the money). Would you kill one person to keep the world from being blown up? Would it make a difference if the person was a healthy baby, or someone on their deathbed? How do you know for sure it is necessary?
This similar to the situation in The Dark Knight where two ferry boats had the power to blow up the other and were told if they didn’t by a certain time, they would both be blown up. But they couldn’t be absolutely certain that would happen.
Hmmmmm, I guess that was a bit on the heavy side. But either we’re our brother’s keeper or we’re not. Everything I see says not. We seem more than capable of letting our brother die by the thousands every day.
OK. Let’s change our attitude here. That busload of people were going to die at some point anyway. Let’s take the “legacy” they leave (50 mil) and do something with it that has some impact. How about sponsoring a village in some area of the world that has absolutely nothing but a starvation existence? Do the whole ball of wax. Feed 'em, get them medical attention, help them find ways to feed themselves and build enough infrastructure to maintain more than a starvation existence. Get the education process up and running, and enough resources to keep the children in school till they are able to use that education to sustain a better life for their village. Give them the resources to create self sufficiency.
There. Is that better?
Oh, and I’m not a lovable nice guy. Put that one to rest.
JT,
[size=85][SIGH] [/size]I just can’t win with you, can I?
As I read the OP, the fact that I would be taking the money is causing the death of a busload of people. I wouldn’t take the money. As I see it, those people could live out their normal lives and that $50mil could still be used for good. I don’t see it as the “lifeboat” choice, at least not as it’s positioned in the original question. Maybe I was reading it too literally.
Greed is not evil. It is a survival tool only. Intent makes good or evil. If he took the money just to get rid of the people then that would fit into evil. His actions ensured his survival and his family’s survival. The intent was not too harm just to get ahead and survive. That it was done at the expense of another is a natural occurance throughout the world. You can allow others to survive or you survive. Animals do it everyday. We still have most of our animal instincts in tact even though it gets blurry. It is intent that makes actions good or evil.
You never know if it is necessary, you can only guess and have hope. Each person has their own criteria for choosing. what works for you will probably not work for me. I can guess from experience with multitudes of people that the chances are very good the person after me will lack my level of altruism. It is also possible that the next person could figure out how to save the people and still get the money… The odds on that are extremely poor, not worth the risk.
Tent, Yes that is a better way to help… but, all 50 on one village? There are better ways to help more to survive.
OK you are not lovable or nice. I lied people! He is mean, as mean as he can possibly be :-"
But you, and I, and everyone else in this country do that every single day.
Consider: The largest employer in your state sells product to the military (the military in many countries) They make money when they sell their products to the military. In turn, some of that money is used to pay the salaries of many people. Either those who work for that company, those who supply materials to that company, or those who invest in that company.
Some of the products produced by that company are used by various military organizations to aid in the killing of people - lots of people. OK, there are multiple layers of abstraction here, but it is illusion to say that we don’t aid, abet, and support the killing of people - and for what? MONEY.
That each of us is an “assassin” several times removed doesn’t alter the fact that we share responsibility for needless deaths.
I never asserted that we don’t aid, abet and support the killing of people. I realize that we do that every day, and I also realize that the way in which my tax dollars are used can and does result in people’s deaths. It is a result of the way I live, partly because of circumstance, and partly because of choices that I myself have made. I’m not oblivious to that in any way. It wasn’t my intention to come across as “I’m blameless and want to remain that way” so I may not have expressed myself very well. My hands are just as dirty as the next person as far as that goes and I know it.
But to me there is a distinction, maybe not a great one, but a distinction nonetheless, between a person earning a living (and thus receiving money) working for the military or a defense contractor or whatever, and taking an outright payment for nothing other than being willing to forfeit other lives. Unless there were a whole lot of extenuating circumstances which weren’t spelled out in the original question, I still would not take the money.
I can’t believe no one’s mentioned social capital! Maybe it’s just because I’m a socialist whose had to put his views in economic terms before, but it seems obvious to me that having ~50 people owe you their lives is worth significantly more than $50 million. That’s not even considering the collateral profit from book deals, bade-for-TV movies, lecture tours, etc. You’ve got a great shot at political office if these people are all from the same town, because you’ve got 50 people who will work hard to repay you, and 50 extended families who owe you their wives, husbands, sisters, brothers, mothers, fathers, daughters, and sons, etc., and therefore their votes. You could guarantee any company at least fifty life-long customers, and a kind of publicity that’s worth millions at least. In actual dollar terms, that kind of networking and PR posturing is priceless.
The point I am aiming for is that people are not a necessary commodity in the world anymore. We have enough people. We need doctors, engineers, etc, but there are more than enough people that could be used to fill those roles. We need things more than we need people. In fact the world is far too full of people already. I think we could do with a cut back in population…
The money doesn’t really come from anywhere or anyone. It is just there. If you don’t choose the money, it won’t get used elsewhere (which I should have mentioned). It’s an either/or…
I don’t agree with the social capital view on things. Those people would only be indebted to you as long as they deem fit. If I ran for office and they disagreed with my views, why would they vote for me? If I ran a company that sold things they don’t want/need, why would they support me? You could sell you heart-string tugging story, but as soon as Pop Idol came back on the ‘loving public’ would forget you in a heartbeat.
Skeniver you can’t change the rules after this many posts, not fair… Wait one minute… which money from which country? That could make a big difference.
I believe there is a lot of nonsense in this thread. The only person who did not write nonsense was AnitaS, in my opinion.
If this implausible scenario ever becomes reality, you would be a fool to believe the terms of this choice would be honored. Thus, the choice makes no difference. Go ahead and choose the $50Million dollars with your plans to save all the orphans – only to find out that the warped person who offered you this warped choice was actually lying to you and trying to test you to see if in fact you are warped too.
There is a movie from yesteryear called Sophie’s Choice which deals with a similarly warped dilemma. She is the mother of two children in a concentration camp. The warped Nazi told her that one of her children will be killed and told her to choose which one lives. After making the agonizing choice, both children are killed.
I am always amazed when people philosophize over human behavior as if humans were molecules bouncing around with pre-defined and predictable physical properties.
My presumption is based on warped humans and lies. It is as sensible as AnitaS. She is just more sensitive than I . For which I am grateful. It is the sensitive ones that keep us barbaric ones civilized.
The reasons i gave my choice are valid ones not nonsense. Such a drastic choice rarely happens but, as jtt points out smaller choices just like it happen everyday to us. We all face minor decisions that affect each other and strangers. sometimes these choices cause harm while helping others. Choosing to drive to the store affects those around us. choosing to purchase food or grow it affects others. Choosing to watch TV rather than call the cops because you noticed someone doing something suspicious at your neighbors is such a choice that is made everyday in cities across the world. Some witness turns their back on a crime every hour of every day just so that they do not have to be bothered or because they fear. That choice is the same as the bus and the 50. The bus and the 50 is a bit more obvious and easier to choose.
Ok see Anita, What did I tell you? You turned down the money and the person behind you took it, that person is only giving 10% to some charity that will only really use 1% of that money to do any actual good, the rest goes into the pockets of the corporate leaders of that charity.
But either we’re our brother’s keeper or we’re not. Everything I see says not. We seem more than capable of letting our brother die by the thousands every day.
Wait one minute… which money from which country? That could make a big difference.