Hypothetically speaking, if your death would save the life of one or more complete strangers that you know nothing about, how many people would need to be saved (if any) in order for you to give up your own life?

EDIT: Your death would be painless and instantaneous.

  • @Jay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    2510 months ago

    Strangers I know nothing about? Sorry, as I dislike people in general, I can’t give a number. I can’t even say if such a number exists. What if I say 100 and they’re all racist?

    I would give my life for my son though. He ain’t no racist. He’s two years old.

    • @OwenEverbinde@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Or what if they are 100 people who are all lying in hospital beds with incurable illnesses that cause excruciating pain, wishing they could die, and now doomed to years more of their unbearable existence?

      • @Jay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        710 months ago

        I would first ask them how they feel about immigration. But joking aside: In the situation itself I would probably feel different.

  • @PiecePractical@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    1010 months ago

    I think if it were over 100 it would be almost always be a yes. But to be entirely honest, t probably depends a lot on the day and the mood I’m in. There are days I might do it for one or two. On the other hand, there are days when I think the planet probably needs fewer humans so yeah, as bad as it sounds to say out loud, it depends entirely on the type of day I’m having.

    Today, I think it’d take at somewhere between 10 and 20. I guess I’m feeling optimistic.

  • Izzy
    link
    fedilink
    810 months ago

    The situation would have to be rather intentional. Like I’m in a room next to a room with the other people and the fact that my death saves them is an absolute beyond questioning. Ideally I’d also be able to see them.

    In that situation probably just 2.

    I don’t think this can be extrapolated to any possible real world scenario.

  • Call me Lenny/Leni
    link
    fedilink
    English
    610 months ago

    At least two. A cell population never survived if their mitosis only splits them into a single cell. Think of me as a cell going through mitosis. If I’m bargaining, I like to increase my legacy in the process.

  • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    410 months ago

    Depends on what type of death it is. Push a button and you’re painlessly gone with no risks? Might as well make that minimum of 0 people.

  • @zacher_glachl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    4
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Is every second person on this fucking website suicidal? I guess the “lemmings” checks out.

    As for me, it would have to be a number of people that, by their sudden absence, manifestly affects the life of people I do know and care about. Like, at least a billion or so if randomly chosen

    edit: and that means possibly fewer if not random and more focused on my geographical location. If 100 mio die on my continent alone then the rest is still pretty screwed.

    • @Kerfuffle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      110 months ago

      As for me, it would have to be a number of people that, by their sudden absence, manifestly affects the life of people I do know and care about. Like, at least a billion or so if randomly chosen

      If they ask someone else, you’d better hope that other person doesn’t think like you - for your sake and the sake of people you care about.

  • Monster
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Depends on the circumstances. If I was meant to choose between a small group of people I love versus millions of other people I don’t know I’d choose the people I love. But, if I were meant to save hundreds of other people, including my loved ones, then I’d gladly do that to.

  • AlexTheTurtle
    link
    210 months ago

    If the people im saving will cumulatively live more than me then ill do it. Simple utilitarian calculus. If Time lost < time saved do it.

    • @JoBo@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      110 months ago

      By that logic, you should be donating all your organs and every drop of blood right now.

      • AlexTheTurtle
        link
        110 months ago

        I should, but i am selfishly not doing so cause im lazy. But if it was just a button to press i dont know if i could convince myself not to press it and save someone.

  • @Kerfuffle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    210 months ago

    So is the question how many it would take for me to believe that I should give my life, or how many before I’d actually have the willpower to choose to die?

      • @Kerfuffle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        610 months ago

        I hope you’re just looking for interesting responses rather than a definite answer!

        I genuinely wonder if saving a negative number of people would be better overall. Humans, especially ones in developed countries like those privileged enough to be posting about stuff like this are responsible for a lot of negative effects we don’t really like to think about. We benefit from exploiting other people, animals, using resources in unsustainable ways.

        I think even if someone takes a lot of individual steps like going vegan, trying to recycle, minimizing transportation and other consumption, not having children, etc that they’re still not even going to break even with the harmful effects just existing causes.

        If it wasn’t for effects like that I’d probably say 2-3 but in reality I’m not really sure if I truly should save anyone. (By the way, you don’t have to worry about me going out and murdering people.)