Saving or sacrificing?

Ah. TRAINS. My favourite subject. Trains have a large minimum safe stopping distance. Some trains won't stop moving for a full mile after the emergency break is pulled. By the time most people get in front of one, it's too late to stop. Train drivers here in Australia are instructed to close the blinds over the windows and speed up.

Greater good? You hear that term a lot alongside the phrase "necessary evil". Both are things I agree with. They don't live up to my ideal of beating odds and getting exactly what I want, but it's a compromise. Not preferable to anyone, however. It would, ultimately, depend on the person whose life would be sacrificed. It comes down to the inherent worth.

If ten normal, mediocre individual wage slaves were the cost to save the life of, say, a doctor, or someone who would be of worth to society in the small and large scales, I think I'd pay that price. "Johnson in accounting" doesn't do as much as, say, a fireman, teacher or doctor. It can't just be "if one person was the price" if you're talking about the greater good. The individual worth of people must be considered.

At least that's the way I think.

William - How do you identify the point of necessity? At what point do you make that decision without aleternatives?

rugadd wrote: William - How do you identify the point of necessity? At what point do you make that decision without aleternatives?

I don't think we're qualified to make that decision as humans. Weird thing to say, I know, but it's true. It's kinda like "playing god," and it's not fun.

I'm a trained first-responder and former First Aid / CPR / AED trainer for the American Heart Association (USA). When you learn "Triage," you accept that you're "playing god:" If you think the patient's viable for treatment, tag them as such. If not, YOU MAKE THE DECISION that they're not, tag them "0 (deceased)" and move on. Oh, and you have 15~20 seconds to make this decision about this person, their family, and all that.... It's not something I like doing. Thankfully, I've not marked the black tag yet, and I hope I never have to. But that day will come. I hope I make the right choice(s).

I don't choose to sacrifice anyone for the greater good. Nature and circumstance do a fine job choosing for me.

Its kind of simple for me though. I just, I take the first one I come to or the weakest one in the group and then I swim as fast and as hard as I can for as long as I can. And the sea takes the rest. -Ben Randall, The Guardian 2006

Ultimately there is no way to rationalize choosing one person over another, or choosing the greater good. Then again, i am a professional life saver and I have had to make those choices.

Just do what you can, for those that you can, for as long as you can. The rest you cannot do anything for, but you can sleep at night because you did every thing you could.

The options rarely are as concrete as one way or another. I would search for an alternative. Furthermore, since I do not know anything about the book- who is to say that the invasion would be detrimental? I don't know if I'm dealing with Cromags (Sliders) or Taelons (Earth Final Conflict).

Alethea Thompson wrote: The options rarely are as concrete as one way or another. I would search for an alternative. Furthermore, since I do not know anything about the book- who is to say that the invasion would be detrimental? I don't know if I'm dealing with Cromags (Sliders) or Taelons (Earth Final Conflict).

Its a part of the New Jedi Order books. Yuuzhan Vong invasion. It ended up killing 300 trillion plus, and they didn't use a superweapon.

V-Tog wrote: Once you put yourself in that position you become God - weighing up people's lives, deciding who is more important.

If someone else wants to play God, then fine...but the idea does not sit right for me personally...

That is, of course, assuming that God exists

In answer to the question: I'd kill the people using a superweapon to save the blillions and then either live the life of a hermit, away from other people or I'd end up killing myself over the guilt of having killed so many.

With no other option than that of everyone dying or sacrificing lots to save a much larger percentage...i'd push the button. Guilt is an emotion like any other, it can be suppressed. In my case, i'am still learning what guilt is.

*shrugs* I have no idea what that means. I don't particularly like Star Wars, so I don't have anything to do with the fiction outside of what is absolutely necessary to teach this path. And honestly, I tend to find better methods of conveying the lessons through real life scenarios.

Anyways, I stand by my assessment that the options are rarely as concrete and one or the other.

Shao Kyras wrote:

V-Tog wrote: Once you put yourself in that position you become God - weighing up people's lives, deciding who is more important.

If someone else wants to play God, then fine...but the idea does not sit right for me personally...

That is, of course, assuming that God exists
.

Not really...

We all understand the "God Complex"....

regardless of whether or not he exists, we can still pretend to be 'God'...

What is funny, is we all have power over someone, or something...

We do have the ability to make lives better, or worse...

But, we cannot do "right' all the time... By doing 'right' by some, it will be 'wrong' by others...

Anyways, I stand by my assessment that the options are rarely as concrete and one or the other.

But it does happen...

And that is what I thought was being surmised...

You break a decision down to its most basic element, the "do, or do not", of an individual moment...

You can always change your mind in the next moment, but, in the first moment, you must make a decision...

Decisions, I find, are actually quite often, an 'A' or 'B' type deal... But I have eliminated 'C' and 'D' before this was the case...

It almost always boils down...

So I think...