Cool scenario

[lightsout]

So, I won't go into full details, but I played a game today. Your typical mind fug about ethics, logic, and reasoning. Here it is.

You have two(2) hearts. You have six(6) patients, all of which need a heart transplant. You can only save 2, which means that 4 WILL die. Here are your options:

1. 74-year-old woman who baby-sits the neighborhood kids. Doesn't drink or do drugs. Married.

2. 15-year-old girl in high school. Uses multiple different drugs and uses prostitution as a means of making money to support her drug habit. Grade A student.

3. An ex-Roman-Catholic priest who is gay. He has AIDS as does his partner.

4. A scientist who has found a cure for HIV. He is also a known white-supremacist who is devout in his beliefs.

5. A 25-year-old man who works with troubled youths. He is also a well-respected business man who treats his employees well. He sales and uses drugs.

6. A 35-year-old woman who steals and sales stolen goods from various stores. Has Huntington's Chorea

Now, with all of that, there is no definitive right and wrong. However, the point of this is simply deciding which two will live and which 4 will die and why.

I will hold my opinion for now.

[SgtJoo]

So, I won't go into full details, but I played a game today. Your typical mind fug about ethics, logic, and reasoning. Here it is.

You have two(2) hearts. You have six(6) patients, all of which need a heart transplant. You can only save 2, which means that 4 WILL die. Here are your options:

1. 74-year-old woman who baby-sits the neighborhood kids. Doesn't drink or do drugs. Married.

Too old to be of further use to society. If you want a baby-sitter hire a high school kid. No.

2. 15-year-old girl in high school. Uses multiple different drugs and uses prostitution as a means of making money to support her drug habit. Grade A student.

Will likely end up in further trouble because of hard? drugs/prostitution regardless of good grades. No.

3. An ex-Roman-Catholic priest who is gay. He has AIDS as does his partner.

Incurable disease (dgaf about the other details)? No.

4. A scientist who has found a cure for HIV. He is also a known white-supremacist who is devout in his beliefs.

Cure for HIV? I can overlook his beliefs. Check.

5. A 25-year-old man who works with troubled youths. He is also a well-respected business man who treats his employees well. He sales and uses drugs.

Sells and uses drugs? Nothx.

6. A 35-year-old woman who steals and sales stolen goods from various stores. Has Huntington's Chorea.

Thief AND old? Nothx.

Now, with all of that, there is no definitive right and wrong. However, the point of this is simply deciding which two will live and which 4 will die and why.

I will hold my opinion for now.

Now there's an extra heart for the poor 11 year old waiting somewhere in the world who hasn't committed a single misdeed in his life. Failing that, if you force me to pick another person I'd choose the straight A prostitute.

[GritsRgreat]

Where the F can i "meat" no. 2?

[lightsout]

Where the F can i "meat" no. 2?

Bound to be somewhere in Asheville.

[GritsRgreat]

4) Hell, Henry Ford was a racist and i'm sure he wasn't the only one. I can overlook his bs if his work makes the world a better place.

5) Drugs should be legal/

[SgtJoo]

Where the F can i "meat" no. 2?

Back alley in Uptown late at night?

Failing that, Singapore/Southeast Asia I reckon.

[lightsout]

Now there's an extra heart for the poor 11 year old waiting somewhere in the world who hasn't committed a single misdeed in his life. Failing that, if you force me to pick another person I'd choose the straight A prostitute.

That is interesting. You chose what the majority did. Now me and a few others picked instead the ex-priest. Why? Very simple. Given the "fact" (for the purposes of this scenario) that there is a cure for HIV, there stands a great chance at a cure for AIDS. Given this, he is the purest of them all (well, at least on the same level with the scientist/white supremacist). Due to this, he should be the one who lives.

The reason I chose against the 15-year-old prostitute is because I work under the assumption all people have the ability to change, I just don't think many do. Given my personal belief, and the fact that it doesn't say she WILL change in the scenario (which is the reason why everybody justified picking her in the group that was given this scenario), I see no reason to pick her over the alternative (although, she would be the 3rd option). Just my .02 though.

[SgtJoo]

That is interesting. You chose what the majority did. Now me and a few others picked instead the ex-priest. Why? Very simple. Given the "fact" (for the purposes of this scenario) that there is a cure for HIV, there stands a great chance at a cure for AIDS. Given this, he is the purest of them all (well, at least on the same level with the scientist/white supremacist). Due to this, he should be the one who lives.

The reason I chose against the 15-year-old prostitute is because I work under the assumption all people have the ability to change, I just don't think many do. Given my personal belief, and the fact that it doesn't say she WILL change in the scenario (which is the reason why everybody justified picking her in the group that was given this scenario), I see no reason to pick her over the alternative (although, she would be the 3rd option). Just my .02 though.

Well if you alter the parameters of the scenario like that I'd probably go with the ex-priest. :p

Or if you prefer, once the conditions were clarified my opinion changes slightly.

[Delhommey]

Asking these kinds of ethics questions are like asking where you'd take Jessica Alba if she'd asked you out.

[GritsRgreat]

So, I won't go into full details, but I played a game today. Your typical mind fug about ethics, logic, and reasoning. Here it is.

You have two(2) hearts. You have six(6) patients, all of which need a heart transplant. You can only save 2, which means that 4 WILL die. Here are your options:

1. 74-year-old woman who baby-sits the neighborhood kids. Doesn't drink or do drugs. Married.

2. 15-year-old girl in high school. Uses multiple different drugs and uses prostitution as a means of making money to support her drug habit. Grade A student.

3. An ex-Roman-Catholic priest who is gay. He has AIDS as does his partner.

4. A scientist who has found a cure for HIV. He is also a known white-supremacist who is devout in his beliefs.

5. A 25-year-old man who works with troubled youths. He is also a well-respected business man who treats his employees well. He sales and uses drugs.

6. A 35-year-old woman who steals and sales stolen goods from various stores. Has Huntington's Chorea

Now, with all of that, there is no definitive right and wrong. However, the point of this is simply deciding which two will live and which 4 will die and why.

I will hold my opinion for now.

1) Nice lady, see you in heaven.

2) I think the grades will go to waste, Seen it all before she's done.

3) Mmmm IDK this is a tough one but aids will kill him sooner or later.

4) Keeper as stated in my above post.

5) Keeper, the reason i picked him over the 15 y/o is because he is living a productive life, helping others and such. The girl is just in it for herself, dead weight.

6) low life, pass.

[frash.exe]

how is this a cool scenario

[Razzy]

Now there's an extra heart for the poor 11 year old waiting somewhere in the world who hasn't committed a single misdeed in his life. Failing that, if you force me to pick another person I'd choose the straight A prostitute.

.

[Wither]

I got this. Give me a minute.

[Wither]

So, I won't go into full details, but I played a game today. Your typical mind fug about ethics, logic, and reasoning. Here it is.

You have two(2) hearts. You have six(6) patients, all of which need a heart transplant. You can only save 2, which means that 4 WILL die. Here are your options:

1. 74-year-old woman who baby-sits the neighborhood kids. Doesn't drink or do drugs. Married.

2. 15-year-old girl in high school. Uses multiple different drugs and uses prostitution as a means of making money to support her drug habit. Grade A student.

3. An ex-Roman-Catholic priest who is gay. He has AIDS as does his partner.

4. A scientist who has found a cure for HIV. He is also a known white-supremacist who is devout in his beliefs.

5. A 25-year-old man who works with troubled youths. He is also a well-respected business man who treats his employees well. He sales and uses drugs.

6. A 35-year-old woman who steals and sales stolen goods from various stores. Has Huntington's Chorea

Now, with all of that, there is no definitive right and wrong. However, the point of this is simply deciding which two will live and which 4 will die and why.

I will hold my opinion for now.

#4 (Scientist) - who will save #3 (Priest) before he needs a transplant.

#3 (Priest) convinces #5 (Youth Guy) to stop using hard drugs, which saves his heart.

#5 (Yough Guy) convinces #2 (Girl) to stop her hard life style, and her issues are caught before they escalate.

#2 (Girl) convinces #6 (Thief) to give up her habits, which saves her soul.

#6 (Thief) now babysits children and allows #1 (Old Woman) to live peacefully, easing the stress on her heart.

No one said they were all at the same time or that an alteration in their lifestyle wouldn't affect fate. :p

In reality: #4 easily, and #5 or #2 (people change).

However, to take this deeper, the cure of AIDS could lead to a higher world population which in turn causes more starvation, violence, etc. How much of a moral decision would it be if you knew that curing a disease would be the right thing, yet it would lead to more pain and suffering?