The value of a life - a social experiment.

[ZtH]

I can agree with the 3% figure given earlier. That is a huge donation to someone who needs it while out of the 1,000,000 I just recieved it is a tiny percentage.

 

[Ace of Spades]

50,000. That should be enough to tide him over.

 

[zehydra]

about 10,000, in exchange for his name and ailment.

I don't need all that money, and if I ever strike rich, I plan on giving most of it away.

 

[uc.asc]

Zero. Probably millions of people die every year from things that can be prevented for very small amounts of money. Malaria, dengue fever, hunger. Do you care more about person X, or about adorable starving orphan children?

You can also look at it from a heartless bastard perspective. Since probably millions of people die every year from things that can be prevented for very small amounts of money, the fact that we don't donate every spare penny to fixing those things already means we are heartless, myopic bastards who care more about our fast food and HD plasma televisions than we care about adorable starving orphan children, so the odds of us caring about person X are slim.

Want to know how many starving orphan children you could save by getting a second job and giving that income to charity? Hmm? The answer is 25 cents per meal, so by working one hour at minimum wage (US, give or take) you could feed five starving children for a day. Have you ever purchased a thousand-dollar television? That money could have fed one starving child for three and a half years.

If any of us were good people, we would live as cheaply as we can and give everything we can spare to help people who actually need it. Realizing this, we have two choices: We can do the moral and logical thing, and completely restructure our lives to do the most good in the world; or we can accept that we are heartless bastards and move on. Maybe we'll play portal 2, which is sure to take our mind off the 66 starving orphans we could have fed for a day for the same amount of money.

 

[Cheesus333]

Well, the only thing I can think of buying with more than £100,000 is a house. And I like the house I have.

So - hypothetically - I'd give £900,000 to Generic Dying Man, and selfishly indulge myself with the remaining 10% of my mysterious winnings. I think that's fair enough.

EDIT: I'd also like to address the people saying 'none, he means nothing to me':

If the roles were reversed and you were told that a complete stranger were given the money to help you but kept it all to themself, would you understand why and forgive them for it?

Not that it'll change your decision, I'd just like to see if you'd be able to put your hands up and say "Yep, fair enough, I get why he did that."

 

[Ralen-Sharr]

I win 1 million
a stranger shows on my doorstep and asks me for money or someone I know nothing about will die

I would take it as a scam and shut the door. Without more information I wouldn't be bothered to give a damn. It might sound harsh, but if it was public knowledge that I had 1 million in the bank I'd have a VERY hard time trusting anyone at all.

That's why if I DID win the lottery or something I'd be trying to keep it on the down-low, and I'd even go as far as changing my name if I had to.

 

[Grigori361]

None, at least not yet, even IF I'm sure someone isn't lying, I'm not stupid enough to trust my gut over evidence. I LOOK into the situation and then make a judgment. I simply lack enough information to make a properly educated decision, I realize this is "missing the point" (I realize I'm suppose to make a choice based on the sliding scale you gave me) of what you're trying to do. But at the end of the day The question is irrelevant because I don't make snap decisions like that, at least not with regards to money. Which as you stated previously is closely tied to human survival in our current social organizational model.

Your question fails to satisfy my standards for decision making, you get a hello kitty mug for effort though.

PS I do know some people who absolutely Would give it all away without a second thought if they thought someone else needed it more. Don't discredit a point of view just because you wouldn't see it as reasonable, that is unscientific.

 

[Jinjiro]

EDIT: I'd also like to address the people saying 'none, he means nothing to me':

If the roles were reversed and you were told that a complete stranger were given the money to help you but kept it all to themself, would you understand why and forgive them for it?

Not that it'll change your decision, I'd just like to see if you'd be able to put your hands up and say "Yep, fair enough, I get why he did that."

That's a ridiculous counterpoint - we wouldn't assume to take some random person's money that wasn't affiliated with a charity. When you're struck with a disease, you don't immediately go "Oh, who's recently won money in the lottery? Let's ask them!"

OT: I'd give jack shit to a single person, but 800,000 would go straight to the Red Cross.

 

[liquidus118]

Why would I give up all that money for someone I don't know? I don't empty my bank account onto every single homeless person I see and I don't go into a hospital offering money to ill people for when they get out and I certainly won't give any to some random asshole who for whatever reason I'm expected to save.
Yeah, some people have some seriously bad shit, but I'm not gonna be the one that has to clear up other people's messes if I don't even know the person.
I'd give a fair few thousand if they'd had a life story with enough guilt-trip points, though.

But since this is about the value of a human life I'd also like to say I'd blow vast amounts on the people I know and care about if they fell ill because I value the people I care about more than I do money.

 

[NoseDigger]

None. Nope. Mainly for reason already stated. Especially the monkeysphere one. I won't really care about someone I don't know.

 

[Cheesus333]

EDIT: I'd also like to address the people saying 'none, he means nothing to me':

If the roles were reversed and you were told that a complete stranger were given the money to help you but kept it all to themself, would you understand why and forgive them for it?

Not that it'll change your decision, I'd just like to see if you'd be able to put your hands up and say "Yep, fair enough, I get why he did that."

That's a ridiculous counterpoint - we wouldn't assume to take some random person's money that wasn't affiliated with a charity. When you're struck with a disease, you don't immediately go "Oh, who's recently won money in the lottery? Let's ask them!"

In the hypothetical situation, you - a random millionnaire - were asked to donate. Therefore, if the roles were reversed, it would still be a random millionnaire, and it would be your life that depended on them.

 

[Ohhi]

I would give them nothing I might dangle the money in front of their face then proceed to spit on them but in truth I wouldn't even give my loved ones the money people die everyday why is this man so different to me he isn't even worth the mud on my shoes.

 

[Jinjiro]

EDIT: I'd also like to address the people saying 'none, he means nothing to me':

If the roles were reversed and you were told that a complete stranger were given the money to help you but kept it all to themself, would you understand why and forgive them for it?

Not that it'll change your decision, I'd just like to see if you'd be able to put your hands up and say "Yep, fair enough, I get why he did that."

That's a ridiculous counterpoint - we wouldn't assume to take some random person's money that wasn't affiliated with a charity. When you're struck with a disease, you don't immediately go "Oh, who's recently won money in the lottery? Let's ask them!"

In the hypothetical situation, you - a random millionnaire - were asked to donate. Therefore, if the roles were reversed, it would still be a random millionnaire, and it would be your life that depended on them.

Hypothetical situations aside, I doubt my options would be so limited as to approach recent lottery/gambling winners and beg for their cash. That'd be low on the list of things to do, and possibly not even on it, since the chances of them saying 'yes' are incredibly low. Imagine if every dying person did that - winning the lottery would be like a curse as a flood of tragically sick people came to your doorstep.

 

[PatrickXD]

I'd say 10,000. That's a lot of money for one guy to spend on medical, and if they're so fucked that this isn't enough then maybe he or she should just die?

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Will more come up asking if i give it to them? Will he learn to fend for him/herself if i give it to them or will they realies they can get away by asking rich people for money?

No and No. Guys legit, he ONLY needs it to save his life and nothing else. This will not impact you in any way and he will never ask for your help ever again.

EDIT: I'd also like to address the people saying 'none, he means nothing to me':

If the roles were reversed and you were told that a complete stranger were given the money to help you but kept it all to themself, would you understand why and forgive them for it?

Not that it'll change your decision, I'd just like to see if you'd be able to put your hands up and say "Yep, fair enough, I get why he did that."

That's a ridiculous counterpoint - we wouldn't assume to take some random person's money that wasn't affiliated with a charity. When you're struck with a disease, you don't immediately go "Oh, who's recently won money in the lottery? Let's ask them!"

In the hypothetical situation, you - a random millionnaire - were asked to donate. Therefore, if the roles were reversed, it would still be a random millionnaire, and it would be your life that depended on them.

Hypothetical situations aside, I doubt my options would be so limited as to approach recent lottery/gambling winners and beg for their cash. That'd be low on the list of things to do, and possibly not even on it, since the chances of them saying 'yes' are incredibly low. Imagine if every dying person did that - winning the lottery would be like a curse as a flood of tragically sick people came to your doorstep.

Youre really missing the point. He can ONLY get this money from you. For some reason, its a hypothetical situation...

I win 1 million
a stranger shows on my doorstep and asks me for money or someone I know nothing about will die

I would take it as a scam and shut the door. Without more information I wouldn't be bothered to give a damn. It might sound harsh, but if it was public knowledge that I had 1 million in the bank I'd have a VERY hard time trusting anyone at all.

That's why if I DID win the lottery or something I'd be trying to keep it on the down-low, and I'd even go as far as changing my name if I had to.

Please read the OP. Like all of it. I devote an entire two paragraphs to saying he is 100% legit. I gave a random example but theres an ultimatum. Without any of your money he will die. You dont know how much he needs. How much do you give.

 

[Zykon TheLich]

I'd tell him to go to a hospital and get the treatment for free on the NHS like everyone else.

 

[Tanner The Monotone]

Im doing this along with a second question ill ask at a later date once i gather feedback from this one. Im trying to determine the percieved monetary value of a person depending on the scenario.

Ill cut right to it and ask you the question. You just won 1'000'000 pounds. Lets assume you arnt that well off, you could considerably improve your life with this money. However there is a person. Lets call them X. Without money to pay for treatment they will die. You have never met person X. You have no idea if they are a hobo or a neurosurgon. You are asked to give as MUCH as possible to help them. You arnt told how much money they need, or if others will help fill in the shortfall. How much money do you give to save this persons life? You know if you give none. The person. Will. Die. What % of this money would you give to help one single life? By honest. Like really honest. Dont say "all of it" because likely hood is if this actually happened (you won the lottery) you COULD do this but wouldnt. People need money to survive.

You wouldnt give 100% of it away. How much of this would you keep to yourself and whats the maximum amount you would give to preson x. TO clarify theres no underhanded motive here. Its not a trick. You know its going to exactly what its for. You cant give too much money. Maybe they need far more than your million. You are just asked to help.

Imagine someone is literally at your door, tells you this and asks for cash because theyve seen you on tv. And for some reason you are certain they are not lying. On the spot. How much do you donate.

I would probably give up to a 1/4 of it. If it costs anymore, it would probably be some crazy,experimental treatment that would probably not work.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Your question fails to satisfy my standards for decision making, you get a hello kitty mug for effort though.

PS I do know some people who absolutely Would give it all away without a second thought if they thought someone else needed it more. Don't discredit a point of view just because you wouldn't see it as reasonable, that is unscientific.

Thanks for such a wonderfull contribution. Next time ill try harder to appease your question standards. So then my thread will finally be good enough to get a real answer.

Look you know if you give SOME amount of money, the person will recieve treatment. The question is if in 1'000'000 different parallell universes one person came to your door and asked for different amounts of money from 1 to 1000000 for the exact same situation, past what point would you start saying no.

 

[Blow_Pop]

Well, the only thing I can think of buying with more than £100,000 is a house. And I like the house I have.

So - hypothetically - I'd give £900,000 to Generic Dying Man, and selfishly indulge myself with the remaining 10% of my mysterious winnings. I think that's fair enough.

EDIT: I'd also like to address the people saying 'none, he means nothing to me':

If the roles were reversed and you were told that a complete stranger were given the money to help you but kept it all to themself, would you understand why and forgive them for it?

Not that it'll change your decision, I'd just like to see if you'd be able to put your hands up and say "Yep, fair enough, I get why he did that."

I would. Some people's situations are different than others. Like I actually could use that money and use it well. I need a running car and to pay off my school loans. And I need the car to help with job issues. Riding a bike only gets you so far.......Same with walking.

 

[Plurralbles]

No. They die. Game over.