You don't know what they could accomplish, don't try to look at this from the perspective of hindsight or try to think about forresight.
There you are, with this choice. A child or a man, and all you know about them is what they have done thus far, which is relative good and how long they have to live should you save them.
If you want a situation, lets say they both have a terminal disease and you only have enough medicine to save one. They are in a coma so you can't learn anything about them personally.
What if the Man does the same?What if that child grows up to create a cure for cancer? Or ends world hunger? Or is the next greatest thinker and can take the human race to other solar systems?
Both the same.The question to me isn't who do I think is most deserving, the question to me would simply be who could I get to the quickest.
An innocence? I have seen no innocence. They throw tantrums when they don't have their way, they gleefully abuse their peers, they are selfish, ignorant and cruel.I would say to save the child. The old man may be wise, but if he is already 100, than he would have already out lived his youth, no? So he has already seen 100 years of life, grown up, and seen the world. If you didn't save the 5 year old child, you would be denying him a chance to see and learn. Also, children have an innocence that no adult has.
Lets say you don't know.In short, it is a tossup, and too many factors (such as who they are... personality wise) are left unaccounted for.







Bookmarks