If you would instantly receive a million dollars with the trade-off being that someone you don't know dies...would you do it?
Does the likelihood increase if more money was offered? (Would you do it for 2 million? 3? etc...)
I have a theory that everyone has a price (myself included). I used to be idealistic, but not so much any more. Don't get me wrong - I have a really strong sense of loyalty...but everyone has a price.
To diffuse how I've made myself sound like a modern-day Judas, let's introduce another thought experiment I've put together:
Would you allow your parents to be killed for a million dollars? Probably not. They raised you and you can't really put a value on them.
But what if you were offered a billion dollars?
With that billion, you could either:
- cure AIDS
- cure cancer
- propagate world peace
- stop global warming
- stop world hunger
- buy real books for the haitian children in make-shift schools under a tree
- adopt the abandoned cat named Agnes who's missing two legs and now rolls around with a wheelchair as its hind legs
- pay to put people like Hervie in a grade 2 workshop/introductory course for very basic grammar (because apparently, at this age, "shit" styll has a y in it)
- buy Adrian a real car (because his Bimmer sucks...ha)
- devise a plan to meet Heidi Klum so you can ask her how the hell she fell in love with Seal
- (I should probably stop now before I get carried away)
- or any other worldly ambition for the quest of good that you might have
If you could find a way to resurrect your parents, would you do it?
• If no, then you're now responsible for the millions who will die from aids in the next couple of years.
• If yes, you've (somewhat) betrayed your parents and have betrayed your own principles.
What do you have to lose if you can find a way to resurrect your parents to the exact state that they were in before they died?
So now comes the idealism & integrity...and I'm just a kid trying to figure out where I stand.
- knowledge
• If yes, you've (somewhat) betrayed your parents and have betrayed your own principles.
What do you have to lose if you can find a way to resurrect your parents to the exact state that they were in before they died?
So now comes the idealism & integrity...and I'm just a kid trying to figure out where I stand.
- knowledge
A billion dollars cannot cure AIDS because it is uncurable.
ReplyDeleteAlthough a billion dollars can HELP save cancer patients for a longer period of time, it will not prevent cancer from moving on to other people. And what about when that billion dollars is all used up? Then what?
A billion dollars would not bring world peace because as much as we'd like to believe we are not greedy, we are.
A billion dollars can feed many mouths, but ultimately it will not stop world hunger.
A billion dollars can buy a shitload of books for Haitian children in make shift schools, however, there will probably be
no more trees left to sit under because they'd be used to make that billion dollars.
With a billion dollars I'd certainly adopt that cat in a wheel-chair. I'd use Agnes like a circus act and try to make another million dollars. Cummon now, how often do you see a cat in a wheel chair?
I would actually buy both of Adrians cars off of him, because hoenstly, I like them lol.
If you want to know why Heidi Klum fell in love with Seal, I already know the answer. Heidi Klum said in an interview with Oprah that she liked the size of his TT because she could see his bulge through his biker shorts. No lies haha.
As for Hervie.....you'd need 2 billion dollars...styll.
Sorry I got too lazy to answer every other question, so I'll get to them another time.
Also, I just realized that 3 years is not enough time to take care of all these issues. After all, the world will end in 2012 Ha.
-TonTon
I don't think it's fair to say that cancer and/or aids is impossible to cure.
ReplyDeleteAs for Heidi Klum and Seal - they're 3 kids in, it's gotta be more than "the bulge in his biker shorts". Regardless, I gotta applaud her for that.
& Who are we kidding, Hervie's grammar is a lost cause.
btw Ton, way to completely neglect to answer the question that was fully bolded. Ton, I am disappoint.
- knowledge
Yo, so you think you can really cure aids with a million dollars? Better yet, are you one of those people that believe that aids is a conspiracy theory that the gov't is behind?
ReplyDeleteStop hating on Heidi Klum and Seal.
A million dollars wouldn't really cure aids, cancer, stop world hunger, or solve global warming. Sure you can donate money to help research, but I'm sure a million dollars wouldn't do much. Considering the research they actually do is too complicated for most people to understand. The materials and equipments they use are probably more than half a mil alone. So with the million that would be offered, I don't think I would take it. As much as I would try to help the world and all, it doesn't seem right to have to pick, or that you would be given that choice. You're not God (supreme being or whatever, cos I know you're all iffy about God) and I doubt you have the life experience to know how to choose what cause to help.
-M.Pala
@M.Pala:
ReplyDelete"so you think you can really cure aids with a million dollars?"
> The original idea was a billion. But even then...it most likely still wouldn't be enough.
"Better yet, are you one of those people that believe that aids is a conspiracy theory that the gov't is behind?"
> I'm still undecided, but it's definitely not out of the question: http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/aids.htm#5676977 (scroll to 'HIV/AIDS made in America?"
Besides, AIDS does serve as a sort of population control...and we definitely need that.
"I don't think I would take it. As much as I would try to help the world and all, it doesn't seem right to have to pick, or that you would be given that choice. "
> But if you WERE given that choice...would you simply walk away from it? For the purpose of the discussion, we can change the variable of money to whatever amount needed to do whatever good in the world you want. Are you telling me that you wouldn't take it?
You don't necessarily have to play God, but you can still CHOOSE to help. An example of this is how someone was saying how we expect God to feed the hungry children in Africa. God doesn't necessarily need to step in because the resources ARE available to us - it's just a matter of re-locating them and distributing them evenly. If god isn't willing to help the people it supposedly created, I don't think we should just stand by and say that it's not our place to decide.
If it came down to being able to help millions of people but having to lose my moral composure, then it might just be something worth doing. After all, I don't believe that I'm anything THAT special anyways. But then again...if AIDS DOES serve as a form of population control then maybe we're better off with it anyways :P
Yeah, I realized I didn't answer the question. It's because I really didnt know what I'd do in that situation. But now that I think about it I'm pretty sure I would accept that million $. As long as I never find out who that person was, I would take it....Like you said, everyone has a price.
ReplyDeleteWould the likelihood increase if more money was offered?...Does that mean more people would die?
-TonTon
@TonTon:
ReplyDelete"Does that mean more people would die?"
I originally meant that if you wouldn't take the million for a random person to die, then would 2 million/3million/etc. change your answer. BUT that's a good question...I didn't even think of that. If your price for one person is a million, then for every million we can say that another person dies.
At what point would we stop? :S Haha...we're treading into some pretty dangerous moral territory here...
- knowledge
Hmm, the thought of having a billion dollars for the cost of someone's life.
ReplyDeleteIf everyone has a price, eventually, wouldn't every body say yes to this question? If someone else can say yes, can't I say yes? If I am as disposable as the next person, shouldn't I fight for my survival? At what point do we consider our well being more important to that of someone else? That seems like the actual question. Is my life better than someone else, and at what price? However, what if this offer was exclusive to only you?
Does saving a billion lives repent for that one life that you disposed of (now that I read my questions over, it seems very "war" oriented)? Does it re-establish the moral composure? Does the means justify the end?
Side note: about the curing aids/cancer. I think I'll take a political stand here. It does seem as a form of population control. I think that the government already has or knows the solution to most of the worlds deseases, but if every single person who had aids or cancer was cured, a bunch of medical agents would lose their jobs due to the fact that their service is no longer needed.
Using the money to work towards world peace? I don't think there will ever be peace. I think you can't have one without the other. Can you constitute a world or a place in the world that is peaceful without a world or place that is not? Can you know good from bad without the other? If everything was good/bad, the choices you make won't matter. It would always be at par with the lifestyle you had before. Life would be quite bland.
Yes, yes I would take the billion. I agree with Ton when he says, "As long as I never find out who that person was." However, if that life that were to be taken away was of someone significant to me, it would be a tougher dicision. Also, me killing someone; I don't know yet if I can handle that in my conscience. Will it make me happy? I don't think so. I'm not even that happy now infact (got a mid-term in three and a half hours that I haven't studied for). It'll leave me making more choices and giving me a lot of stress (that means I'm gonna have to spend some of the denario on ganja). Then again, choices means more opportunity. Now for the thought of putting "God" into play. I'm not a very strong believer in God, but for discussion purposses, the thought of him putting me through the test to kill someone for money as a reward boggles my mind. Should I be playing God? Doctors play God all the time.
Alvin-"So now comes the idealism & integrity...and I'm just a kid trying to figure out where I stand."
What are the options of position?
Anyway, I've used my brain enough. Time for a smoke.
-Echo
This is my first post, so I am not going to assume that all the sub questions are to be answered. They are just there to reinforce the first one right?
ReplyDeleteIf I were to receive a million dollars in the exchange of some who I DIDN'T know dying, then I WOULD do it. Although if it were someone I had known then it would be a different story. My life as I know it would be no different if someone who I didn't know died. Therefore the benefits would outweigh the consequences, right? If I had known the result of me becoming an instant millionaire was due to the fact that someone had died, then I would probably feel obligated to use this money to do some good (IE buy adrian a new car, 'cause his current car should be deemed "too uncool to drive")
- Martone
Ps. Did this topic arise because of your discussion with Ms. Rexho?
@ Echo(pt.1):
ReplyDelete"If everyone has a price, eventually, wouldn't every body say yes to this question? If someone else can say yes, can't I say yes?
>In theory, everyone should give in once it reaches their price. Maybe some people do exist that would turn away an unlimited amount of money which can be used for good just for the sake of integrity - I highly doubt it. The higher you go up, the more likely people are going to give in.
If I am as disposable as the next person, shouldn't I fight for my survival?
>I don't think you should justify it by saying "if he/she can do it, so can I". Ethics shouldn't be based on mass appeal, it should be your personal answer to approaching things. You need to come to terms with how YOU wanna live.
At what point do we consider our well being more important to that of someone else?
>We are as disposable as the next person. I personally don't think any one of us is THAT special. Certain people are important to me...but they're probably not that important to the rest of the world. I'm sure we're unique, but we're no more special than ant A is to ant B. For the most part, we work on a "screw you, me first" attitude. In fact, isn't that how business works?
Is my life better than someone else, and at what price? However, what if this offer was exclusive to only you?
>I don't think our lives are any more important than anyone else when looked at objectively...but our self-serving bias makes us want to think we're more important.
Does saving a billion lives repent for that one life that you disposed of? Does it re-establish the moral composure?
>If the offer was exclusive to only me, I don't think it'd matter. My decision would still be the same. Whether or not someone else does it has no bearing on my decision. I decide after weighing it all myself.
"Does saving a billion lives repent for that one life that you disposed of?"
>If we factor in how no one's special, then I DO think that sacrificing one life to save millions would be worth it. It sucks to be the one being sacrificed, but it makes sense.
Does the means justify the end?"
>Whether "The means justify the ends?" is something I've been trying to answer for years (literally). I still haven't come to a conclusion. I've thought of thousands of situations, and I still can't figure it out. I can think of some where it would, and some where it wouldn't...so I still can't come up with a concrete answer for myself.
"I think that the government already has or knows the solution to most of the worlds deseases."
>It's definitely plausible. I'm still undecided though, but there are statistics and (arguable)"facts" that support this.
"Using the money to work towards world peace? I don't think there will ever be peace. I think you can't have one without the other. Can you constitute a world or a place in the world that is peaceful without a world or place that is not? would be quite bland."
>Personally, I wouldn't want world peace. Life would be boring. We need the evil - not only to recognize the good, but to keep our species in check.
- knowledge
@ echo(pt.2):
ReplyDelete"Yes, yes I would take the billion. I agree with Ton when he says, 'As long as I never find out who that person was.'"
>Would your answer change if the person who you killed knew who you were, even if you didn't know they were? Would your answer change if you had to look them in the eye before accepting the million?
"Should I be playing God? Doctors play God all the time."
>Exactly!
"What are the options of position?"
1) Take the million & someone you don't know dies
2) Don't take the million, miss opportunities & someone you don't know lives.
>I think that people are ONLY thinking about the person(singular) that dies. You'd all probably be a lot more guilty if you started thinking about how they might be the breadwinner of a family... Or how it's the only surviving parent that a kid has...Or how many lives you'd be affecting by taking theirs.
- knowledge
@ Martone: Good to hear from you, Jonny.
ReplyDeleteThis is my first post, so I am not going to assume that all the sub questions are to be answered. They are just there to reinforce the first one right?
> Answer whichever questions appeal to you, even if they're not questions that are asked by me. This isn't just an individual discussion between you and me...it's between everyone here.
If I were to receive a million dollars in the exchange of some who I DIDN'T know dying, then I WOULD do it. My life as I know it would be no different if someone who I didn't know died. Therefore the benefits would outweigh the consequences, right?
> How about if you add in these factors:
- Would your answer change if the person who you killed knew who you were, even if you didn't know who they were?
- Would your answer change if you had to look them in the eye before accepting the million?
Ps. Did this topic arise because of your discussion with Ms. Rexho?
> Nope, she was just one of the people I talked to it about before.
- knowledge
Well, knowledge, my decision wouldn't change if the person knew who I was and I didn't know them. However, if I were to look a stranger in the eye before I recieve the million, the decision would be a lot harder to make. What more if I had to do the killing personally?
ReplyDeleteNow about looking about how the killing would effect the lives of the significants of the individual. Having somne empathy, I would feel really bad and consider myself selfish. But that's the thing, let's say you do it for a good cause, to save the lives of billions of others. Once again the question arrises, "Does the means justify the end?" It is not like the death of that individual died in vain. He died for the lives of many others. He/she would be like friggin' Jesus for goodness sake.
haha -Echo
There are some things money can't buy, for everything else.. there's MasterCard.
ReplyDeleteI just saw the commercial, felt like I'd toss in the slogan for some sort of lame attempt at a pun.
"If you would instantly receive a million dollars with the trade-off being that someone you don't know dies... would you do it?"
"Does the likelihood increase if more money was offered?"
Yes, I would take it and screw all you people who judge me. Please, don't try to act all "holier than thou" -- I'd really like this topic to be covered on a global scale, somewhat of a poll. It'd be interesting to see the gap between Yes & No answers. People who choose "No" are lying to themselves and deserve a slap.
"Everyone has a price." - preach the truth!
Greed will always get the best of us, if it doesn't.. the decision to refuse and miss out on an opportunity will tear us from the inside 'til the day we're graved.(at least, that's what I think.. but I'm merely speculating.)
Now, what I would do with that money? Honestly, I haven't the slightest clue what to do with that amount of cash.
- AIDS, no.
- Cancer, it's almost 2010, we're still waiting for a medical breakthrough.
- World Peace, *scoffs* This will forever be a myth, I don't think any amount of money would do this justice.
- Global Warming, myth or inevitability?
- World Hunger, solution: Photosynthesis - if we found some way to gain this. Well, you know.. think about it. lol. - otherwise, a billion dollars isn't permanent. Thus, would not solve World Hunger.
- Books for Haitian Kids, sure.
- A cat named Agnes, what the hell? No, I'm not much of a cat person.. regardless of how physically disabled this animal is. (lol, I'm an asshole.)
- No clue who Hervie is, but that's a fantastic idea.
Alright, enough questions -- MOVING ON!
In regards to resurrecting your parents to the exact state they were in before they died.
(keywords: exact state & BEFORE they died.)
They'd be brought back near the brink of death. I don't know about you, but wouldn't that be counterproductive? lol.
I'm outtie, peace.
@ Syeph:
ReplyDeleteThey'd be brought back near the brink of death. I don't know about you, but wouldn't that be counterproductive?
Unless your parents are 80 years old right now, I doubt you could consider them anywhere close to the "brink of death". I'd say it's the complete opposite of counter-productiveness...your parents would be alive again & you'd be a billion dollars richer. Everyone wins.