Poll: Kill one, save millions: A Question of Morals.

[Zombie_Fish]

Yes, no question about it. Though if it was a woman I would have second thoughts. And if it was a child I probably wouldn't do it no matter what's at stake.

Isn't it contradictory to say that you would do it no question about it, then go on to say that there are points when you would question it?

All these "two option" moral quandaries are all, as philosophy students will tell you, FALSE DICHOTOMIES. There are ALWAYS more than two options, and there are ALWAYS alternatives. Study your fallacies, people.

All Critical Thinking students should know this as well. I kind of mentioned the assumption of a lack of alternatives in my two posts about the amount of assumptions this hypothetical situation has:

If it's absolutely certain fact that killing this stranger would save millions and that not killing him (aka anything which would result in him not dieing) would result in the deaths of millions... regardless of anything that happens after choosing not to kill him...

I just didn't use the official terminology. I also forgot to mention this one, but it assumes that me killing this stranger has any significance; if killing him would save millions, why doesn't the person who wants him dead do it himself? Saves time with the whole moral decision thing.

As I've already said, there are plenty of flaws with trying this scenario out in real life, which is why I decided to just call Occam's razor and guess that the man with the gun is lying.

 

[jultub]

I have no idea. I can't understand the pressure of such a situation until I'm in it, and as such I can't actually answer it. I think I would, since otherwise I'd feel directly resposible for the death of those millions, pulling the trigger would probably be easier to live with. But I don't know unless I'm there.

 

[Moridinice]

if the person were my wife, brother, son ect then i would not do it cuz im selfless. if i dont know him sure il shoot him. and the next guy they trolly in. heck there is a good chance i would kill half a million to safe a million.

 

[w-Jinksy]

no matter who it was i'd shoot them if i knew for certain t'would save millions, what is one life compared to millions.

 

[asinann]

I personally would rather have the millions die, too many people on this planet taking my air as is.

 

[jameskillalot]

I'm such a horrible person that i would prefer that the millions die, though I would probably kill the guy afterwords for maximum death. What with humans destroying the planet and all, a couple million deaths would help out quite a bit.

 

[Futurenerd]

11 words: "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few."

 

[CronosYamato]

I would, but not before a long judging of the consequences, and by long, i mean short because I've thought about this for a long time. I know the whole argument of "good that comes from evil is not really good" but that just doesn't do it for me. It would be the same as classic 'sadistic choice' given to most superheroes. Save the one you love, or the millions of the world. The difference here is that superheroes can always do both, but you can't, and in this situation its not even a loved one. In an instant, with the simple pull of a trigger you save millions but destroy only one.

 

[ClunkiestTurtle]

To be honest i would look at it the other way and ask "would you die to save a million people"

I think most people would say yes and given that its just getting shot point blank in the head and nothing really painful or horrendous then the person who is dying would probably go willingly making them the true hero of the story not you.

 

[PrimoThePro]

Assuming we are positive in the fact that lives will be saved because they were initially in danger I would not hesitate to shoot someone I don't know. If I did know them, I would see if there was any other way, if not, I would eventually do it, but not until both of us would be ready.

 

[Raven's Nest]

No, Never Compromise, Not Even In The Face of Armageddon. Murder is unjustifiable regardless of the reason or consequences.

Admirable but naïve...

Sometimes murder is justifiable and can be considered very reasonable given certain circumstances. Killing an innocent to save millions isn't pleasant, but sometimes these sacrifices must be made. It all depends on what is necessary, and what we deem is worth saving...

Flip the scenario and you have this perspective... Would you leave a million innocents to die to save one innocent?

 

[Xorghul]

No. And not because I couldn't kill him, but because I don't care about those millions.

 

[arcticphoenix95]

well think about this, we have way too many people on this planet, and nobody else is doing anything about, so...............

 

[Caurus]

(I voted no)
not wanting to be a bore but I don't see the logic in questions like that. I mean you would have to judge the situation individually. Depending why you were in the situation who was going to be killed etc. If some bloke came over and said kill your mum or many people would die I would tell him to bugger off and book him a cab to the closest mental institute. However if it was a matter of killing Hitler pre war I would do that - thus saving millions.

 

[John Smyth]

No, Never Compromise, Not Even In The Face of Armageddon. Murder is unjustifiable regardless of the reason or consequences.

Admirable but naïve...

Sometimes murder is justifiable and can be considered very reasonable given certain circumstances. Killing an innocent to save millions isn't pleasant, but sometimes these sacrifices must be made. It all depends on what is necessary, and what we deem is worth saving...

Flip the scenario and you have this perspective... Would you leave a million innocents to die to save one innocent?

But the flipped scenario does not call for death. I would gladly save a million at the cost of losing one innocent, however I could never kill that one. Well maybe I would kill one to save many but I wanted to get the watchmen reference on there.

 

[Valthek]

*BLAM*

what? lives at stake?

 

[D088Y]

I don?t know him what would stop me from killing him

 

[linwolf]

I can never kill in cold blood.
If he had a bomb, then yes I could shoot him. But just kill him, no.