scenario is: push this button and you get a million dollars but someone somewhere dies



I had this discussion last night with my wife. I am conflicted entirely on the whole thing.

I then spun it a little and it changed the whole dynamic for me and her and I wondered why....




Scenario 2: You push the button and someone really needing the money got it but someone somewhere still dies.



does the removal of you as the recipient of the money somehow make it more palatable?

if so, why???

what if you got to pick who got the money?

what if you got to pick who died?

Would a random death (that could be someone evil and horrible) be any better /worse than a death you got to single out?

 

i was thinking about this too. in the movie scenario, without knowing all the details, you push the button but you're unsure of who dies. it could be someone very close to you that gets it. i wouldn't push it.

you're scenario 2, again, without knowing details or being able to choose. i wouldn't do anything. if i'm taken out of the loop as a beneficiary and i don't know the other players, i don't want to be responsible since it won't affect me positively. it could affect me badly.

last, if i got to choose who died and who got the money, that's it, no other strings, i'd probably do it.

 

1st off: This movie looks incredibly dumb..... as does the whole premise of the movie in general... The only possible redemption for such a retarded plot is that it IS from the creator of Donny Darko. That however is not enough to blow $20 seeing it in theaters. IMHO

But no.... I would not push the button, and unless you are a psychopath... or there is something seriously messed up with your head....Im not quite sure what the conflict would be? To me, if you would kill some innocent person you dont know for money, you have problems.

 

I would only push the button if the person that was going to die was a terminal patient already signed up for assisted suicide. That wouldn't weigh on my conscience at all. I haven't seen the movie yet, but how desperate must you be for your money problems to be more important than another's life?

 

would never push such a button..

unless i could choose who died. then it would be an easy choice. i'd kill off a few death row inmates, save us some money on the appeals process and donate 90% of the money to their victims or charities. all would be well with my moral compass in that case.

 

[QUOTE=thebig33tuna,Oct 29 2009, 07:50 AM] would never push such a button..

unless i could choose who died.

 

I would probably review their cases first. If there's a big what-if that's on appeal, certainly I wouldn't jump in and end it

I like tinkfist's idea as well...terminal ill patients and donate 90% to fund research into the illness...

I realize this is all kind of 'playing god' but still.

 

If the person who was going to die was a horrible person, did bad things, took lives, etc, and I absolutely was 100% sure they were, then yea, maybe. Otherwise no.

Look at the series Dexter on Showtime... I'd never think I'd be rooting for a serial killer, but he only kills off people who he researches and are bad people.

 

I agree. On top of possibly killing an innocent person, you are also killing someone most likely against their will. I have a problem with that too. Therefore, only assisted suiciders get the button. Also maaaaaybe people that are mid-fall from a high place, because they're going to die anyway.

 

Everyone is going to die anyway. Just a matter of when.