Poll: Kill one to save ten?

[Mookie_Magnus]

OT: All things being equal, say that none of the reasons that these people are dying is because of their own faults. I would not be able to personally make the decision. I would treat the organ donor as best I could, and leave the decision for someone else to make. That's one of my problems... I'm can be terribly indecisive at times.

 

[Semitendon]

More information:

The average person has about 20 sq feet of skin. I personally have recovered 9 sq feet of skin from one donor. This, I can assure you is enough to help more than ten people.

Just in case anyone was wondering, organ and tissue transpant does not in any way affect the "open-casket funeral". All tissue and organ donors can have the open casket, as great pains are taken to prevent any disruption of the greiving process by the family of the donor.

 

[ianwulf]

yup definatly

 

[jonnosferatu]

How about this scenario? This one will likely be a little more difficult to come to a decision.

You are a superhero. You are up against a villain who has, for the moment, disabled your powers. He has an explosive device capable of destroying an entire city apartment district. He decides that he will not destroy the district, on one condition... You must kill a child, an innocent child.

If you choose not to do it, he will detonate the device, killing thousands of people. He has you on a live feed airing on every television within the city and outlying towns. Either way, you live as a murderer, the blood on your hands. Would you kill the child, in order to save thousands of hard-working, contributing members of society? Or would you save face, and spare the child?

If the stipulation on the powers thing is that within the rules of the situation I have no possible means of thwarting his plan (ie the "Because I ****ing said so" clause), then yes, I would kill the child.

 

[clicketycrack]

Depends how pretty the one person is. I would never kill one pretty person to save ten uglies.

 

[SharPhoe]

Doing so would violate my Hippocratic Oath, therefore causing me to lose my license, job, and chance to save far more people in my lifetime. It's not my place to decide that 10 other people are more important than the man I have been tasked to save right this instant. So my answer is no.

 

[Berethond]

Let's go back to me being a doctor -- totally unlikely.
knowing me, I'd be much more likely to run around naked stabbing people while singing Tiny Dancer.
"Hold me closer, tiny dancer!" *stab*

So...I guess... killing all eleven, plus three hundred or so.

I demand the "Run around naked stabbing people while singing Tiny Dancer." poll option.

I love you, berethond.
I was going to ask if just killing all of them was an option.
Because I could never be a doctor.

But, for the sake of the thread, I'll answer...
I'd say that some other doctor gets to make the choice, then sit back and watch as whatever decision he makes slowly destroys his life.

I love you too, Neonbob.

Sitting back isn't as fun as stabbing while singing.

 

[TheNumber1Zero]

it would be my duty as a doctor to try to save him.besides,his organ might be infected with somethin,what if he's a druggie?what if he has cancer?what if he's an alien planning on infecting the human populace by observing this need for organs and is pretending to be dying?on second thought,kill them all,no chances.

 

[freiheit]

No, I would not... Heck I could loose my hypothetical licence and imaginary job for that! But you're skipping an other important question here: Would these 10 people be willing to accept an organ from someone killed for harvesting? Or an even worst case senario: what if these 10 people reject the organs? Then you'll have killed 11 people! lol

 

[Teh Roflchoppa]

It depends on the people who need it condition... If they are 30 somthing then yes id sacrifice one! If seniors and the accident victim is a 23, no...

 

[Neonbob]

I love you, berethond.
I was going to ask if just killing all of them was an option.
Because I could never be a doctor.

But, for the sake of the thread, I'll answer...
I'd say that some other doctor gets to make the choice, then sit back and watch as whatever decision he makes slowly destroys his life.

I love you too, Neonbob.

Sitting back isn't as fun as stabbing while singing.

True, but if you do the sit back and watch thing, then you get the benefit of not being charged with anything.
But that's speaking as if I was actually a doctor, who could feel the ramifications of killing all of them.

Stabbing while singing is indeed a pure joy, so I suppose I must concede the point to you.

 

[jboking]

Someone never bothered to actually read Malthus, clearly.
a) Come on, spell his name right, for Pete's sakes.
b) Malthus wouldn't care either way. His principle was that if the population goes up, resources become scarce and people starting dying, and that if the population goes down, resources are more available and reproduction increases. You wind up at equilibrium within a few cycles either way.

In response to 1, yes, it is your decision. The decision to do nothing is still a decision, and making it only changes your degree of liability in the most superficial of fashions.

A) My bad, I misspelled a name I don't regularly use.
B) Yet we are not at equilibrium so we should do everything we can to reach that point.
C) It was a joke, one that I picked up in debate a long time ago. I'm not a philosophy major.

Retort to the response, so you are saying it becomes viable to kill an innocent person? The way I see it, weighting in and saying "Well ten lifes is worth more than one." is just one way of putting a price on life. Do that and you've turned yourself into ozymandias, aka, a pretentious asshole that believes he knows what's best for everyone. I'm not saying I wouldn't be responsible for the death of the ten individuals.

side note: I might like to ask how these ten people got in this situation.

 

[The_Echo]

I would consult the donor.

 

[VincentX3]

I wouldn't. Imagin his family that are counting on him.

Besides I bet some of those 10 can live another few days.

 

[Lizmichi]

It's also illegal, I believe, for a doctor to just sit by and not help a patient just like a doctor can't just drive by the scene of an accident. They're obligated to stop.

 

[Sparrow]

I'd pull a House and convince the man to do it himself.

 

[stone0042]

Save the man... who are you to decide he should die?

I put yes in the poll, but upon further thought i agree with this... wish i could change my choice lol

 

[lockeslylcrit]

Why half-ass it? Let all eleven die!