You're place in a situation, where you need to choose who lives and who dies.

The situation is unalterable. One (or more) person is going to die and One (or more) person is going to live and you have to choose who.

How do you choose?

I'm interested to see how people value life though.


Would you sacrifice an old man to save a young child, for instance?

It *is* a valid question...

I see this question asked often... Death is indiscriminate; the very young and firm are taken as readily as the very old and the infirm...

I would save as many as I could; I would mourn those who were forced to pass...

But I can guarantee you I would move Heaven and Hell (figuratively speaking) to save everyone, or at least as many as I could... Possibly pave the way to help some save themselves, so that I could rescue others.

As GS put it, no situation is truly inalterable... Only after death does that truth change.

The question is not whether a situation is inalterable, but whether or not we have the power to change it; I answer based on the assumption that I do not.

I cannot say that I would discriminate... I would mourn any loss of life, and so, too, would I opt to save it. The only thing that would alter my course is if I were asked not to save a person by that person, themselves... ("Forget me; my grandchild is in the next room! Get her out!") Aside from that, I would do everything in my power to help everyone...

It would take me a while to recover from the deaths I couldn't help, because then I would know that I could've done something to help them, and I chose to help another, instead...

I pray that I am never put in a situation such as that.

I know that fate is cruel.

Many people ask this question; many people respond "I would change things to save everyone"... Few will admit to their shortcomings, and few want to think about the possibility that they might not be able to react in the most desirable of manners in the least desirable of situations... As part of my philosophy, I have to consider this.

I don't like the idea of a no-win situation, and have never accepted one.

It's all well and good to say this now, but when you are in a situation proper, there's no time to rationalize.

Human nature gives us an inherent survival instinct, which changes the scenario.

It may be up to you to decide who you attempt to save, but natural law and reason dictates that not everyone can be saved.

Taking these into consideration, it's better to say you do what you can when you have the opportunity, and not trying to go out to play the hero, which may get more people killed.
I know. I've seen as much.

Um, hello? If you keep spending all of your time thinking about every person on the planet who has died, and how you could have/might have/should have made a difference, then you're already one step closer to kookoo-banana-town. Every few seconds on this planet, someone dies for some/many/no reason at all. You're a fool to think that you can prevent every single death on the face of the earth. Sometimes things happen. You aren't the reason they die, but if you can save yourself and as many people as you can, you're makung a difference. That is why it's worthwhile to try.

(ps-not trying to be insulting)

You are right Angel. There are things beyond our control, however for most here, when something is going on right in front of us we tend to do whatever we can to effect those situations to the best of our ablities.
Some of us just have a few more tricks up our sleeve to do just that, than the averge person, truth is some have more tricks than others here as well.

Wo lives, who dies, that is a hard decision to make.

I know that this is not going to be the most popular answer, but yes, I would discriminate, and save the ones most likely to advance my research.

Finally something that sounds like a realistic and honest answer.

Nothing personal, but when it comes down to the brass tacks, my research almost always comes first.

Um, hello? If you keep spending all of your time thinking about every person on the planet who has died, and how you could have/might have/should have made a difference, then you're already one step closer to kookoo-banana-town. Every few seconds on this planet, someone dies for some/many/no reason at all. You're a fool to think that you can prevent every single death on the face of the earth. Sometimes things happen. You aren't the reason they die, but if you can save yourself and as many people as you can, you're makung a difference. That is why it's worthwhile to try.

(ps-not trying to be insulting)

I was speaking of only three losses. My two younger siblings and my best friend. They are the ones I could not save, and their memories drive me to save all who I can. Of course, I can see how you got this wrong, memories not being your strong suit.

Finally something that sounds like a realistic and honest answer.

No, just the answer you were looking for.

Bert_the_Turtle wrote:Finally something that sounds like a realistic and honest answer.

Seems a little rude to disregard everyone elses' ideas like that.

GhostSpider wrote:

Finally something that sounds like a realistic and honest answer.

No, just the answer you were looking for.

I kinda got the same feeling. >_>

Ron Caliburn wrote:Exactly. The situation is too vague - we know nothing about those we have to choose between or why we have to choose.

Hence why my answer was vague... Without an exact situation, without knowing the innocents involved, without knowing what's going on, I have to assume it's something along the lines of an entire army invasion, and I'm caught in the middle of the carnage, or something along those lines... In that situation, I would just simply try to get as many people to safety as possible, using whatever means I could. I wouldn't--I couldn't--discriminate...

It's the best answer I can give. Sorry if that's not realistic or honest enough for you.

I was speaking of only three losses. My two younger siblings and my best friend. They are the ones I could not save, and their memories drive me to save all who I can. Of course, I can see how you got this wrong, memories not being your strong suit.


You didn't say that in your post, so I could only make the generalised comment. I know how important saving your family is, trust me. Sorry about them, but you still can't save everyone.

Pardon me if I get a little annoyed after a bunch of people post things like "I don't accept no win situations."

Its a hypothetical question! grrrr

I didn't say that, and I kinda got ignored... In fact, I was the first one to say that there would always be a situation where we couldn't save everyone.

Amen, Eilonwy...

I'll agree with Eilonwy on that one.

Belive me shadowstalker no-win situations are out there, I am caught in one now.

Oh well, I'll fight the good fight, and we'll see if i'm too old for this shit yet or not.

Don't forget to sweep your six there berty, I'm closer than you think.

You choose the one(s) you can actually save. Do the best you can, save as many as you can.