GreeBo: 99.999% of the people here who said they would push it, are liars :) Just sayin.
I'm not. I would push it!
A few reasons why:
1. I do not believe that any scientific setup would ever allow this. I also don't think that a single push of a button would actually kill someone.
2. Let's apply Pascal's theorem to this situation. Draw up a 2x2 grid. On the one side, write: Push & Don't push - On the other axis, write Bluffing & Real. In each box, write the pros & cons of pressing the button according to how the criteria play out. - You will see that in this scenario, anyone would press the button. Someone already applied this to Global warming, and Pascal infamously applied it to the existence of God.
3. Someone has already mentioned the butterfly effect: What if that random person was destined to save your life? Or was your soulmate? - My answer to that is, how many lives have you already affected by your own everyday actions (or inactions)? Are you guilty of turning over the channel whenever there is an appeal for donations to help Ethiopia? Have you ever waved a friend or a relative goodbye as they go off to Iraq or Afghanistan? Did you think about anyone else when you bought that last can of beans from the supermarket? Maybe you pressed the wrong button in an elevator, and as a result, someone was late for work, rushed in the roads & died...The butterfly effect is continuous. You may have already killed someone just because of any decision you made in the past!
4. Finally, here's the main crux of the matter. Let's change a variable. Let's say that if you pressed the button, you'd get a dollar & a random person would die, but if you DIDN'T press the button, a friend or a relative (or you) would be killed instead in their place. What then?
Everyone who has played the moral high ground on this subject has decided to fall hook line & sinker for this scenario. I haven't. I do not think I'm morally reprehensible for saying that I would press the button. Given the situation, I would genuinely press it. - Change the variables though (less money, or that the person who dies would be murdered in front of me), and I probably wouldn't.
People do die all the time...at a rate of 2 per second. These deaths are caused by anything, from still-births to old age, murder, genocide, accidents etc. One thing that is NOT mentioned in the initial argument is how these people will die. Will they be killed by an assasin? Will they simply stop breathing at the press of the button? Is it truly random or predestined?
Nobody has mentioned anything about shooting. If I was told that by pressing the button, an assasin would gun down an innocent somewhere in the world, that puts a slightly different slant on things...but that still would not be me pulling the trigger. It's the moral decision of the assassin if he wants to take part in this experiment, which isn't so much about human morality, but more about whether we are gullible or not.
As I said in the other bit of my post (the one that you didn't quote, or perhaps didn't bother reading), I do not believe that the button would kill anyone. Whether I pressed the button or not, people would still die. I wouldn't be adding to anything in the grand scheme of things. It's a question of whether you actually believe that the button would actually kill anyone, and I have stated without any question, that I don't!
You may disagree with my morals, but then again, I wouldn't send anyone off to war, or put anyone in a dangerous situation where their life was endangered. Politicians, Generals, and fanatics do it all the time! Yet for some reason, we accept their decisions...maybe even applaud them for making those decisions! All I would be doing by pressing the button would be to defy the scientist's criteria, and get some money for applying a bit of sense to the scientific setup.
I'm guessing your problem is comprehension. It's an hypothetical case, unfeasible in real life but proposed for the cheer discussion value. The first post specifies pushing the button would kill someone. Doesn't matter how. You're the cause. You press it someone dies, doesn't matter how. It's not a substitute to someone who would already die, it's an addition. It's not a matter of opinion here, if your logic is "I'd press the button because whomever died would die anyways" then that logic is simply and objectively wrong. You can argue if it's an acceptable price for the 100$, but if you press the button you're the cause of someone's death.
OT: Nope, I have easier and less disturbing ways of making money. Like robbing a fast food Restaurant. With a magnet. They dont even have guns here in Europe.
What the hell kind of organization would do such a diabolical thing? I don't know, but don't want to be involved with them, especially for just a hundred each time.
Damien the Pigeon: Really? Would you really push it, most of the people in this thread? I know that a lot of you guys are joking, but I want to know how many people would really do it.
Think about it, it's $100 for a human life. Some paper in exchange for a person. There's no way.
Of course I'd push it!
Because it WON'T ACTUALLY KILL ANYONE!
It's a scientific experiment that tests morality. No-one gets killed at all, because the button is not actually attatched to a weird lottery/doomsday device.
If scientists were to conduct the experiment in real life, they'd need to factor in whether the subject is gullible enough to believe that the button will work. - It's like urban myths or superstition...believing something that someone else insists is the truth. Ever said "Candyman" in front of the mirror 5 times? I have, and guess what...nothing happens! Yet because of some tacky horror movie, kids were bricking themselves during halloween by stupid dares like that!
Perhaps if the scenario was slightly different....if it wasn't a button, but the trigger of a gun, and the person who was due to die was right in front of me & the gun, then that WOULD be a different matter, but as for the button iteself? Press press press, and claim the money off the idiot who thought I was gullible!!!
That's not the question that is posed in this thread, though. You have added a lot of extra background there. The poll stated that there IS in fact such a button, and it poses the question "would you push it?" That's it. There may actually be an experiment like this, but so far as the OP is concerned, this is not it.
To be honest, I would push it, because if I get money in my hand, but I only get told that someone has died, I (in my position of professional cynic) will doubt if anyone has actually died
On the other hand, if I was shown that person dyeing, or there was some kind of proof, then I wouldn't even consider it
I'd just go ahead and rig a machine up to it to continuously press it forever. By the time it ran out of batteries, everyone would be dead. This way, even if I end up dying early on, everyone else gets to share my fate too :D
I don't know if I would or not, but it's a case of Big Red Button Syndrome. It says 'Do Not Push' but you just have to know what will happen when you do push it.
I just lsot my faith in humanity... again. And here i was, naive enough to consider this forum above the average shit-infested holes called internet forums.
on a second thought, do i get to decide who dies when i push it? if so i might conside rchanging my answer.
Damien the Pigeon: Really? Would you really push it, most of the people in this thread? I know that a lot of you guys are joking, but I want to know how many people would really do it.
Think about it, it's $100 for a human life. Some paper in exchange for a person. There's no way.
Of course I'd push it!
Because it WON'T ACTUALLY KILL ANYONE!
It's a scientific experiment that tests morality. No-one gets killed at all, because the button is not actually attatched to a weird lottery/doomsday device.
If scientists were to conduct the experiment in real life, they'd need to factor in whether the subject is gullible enough to believe that the button will work. - It's like urban myths or superstition...believing something that someone else insists is the truth. Ever said "Candyman" in front of the mirror 5 times? I have, and guess what...nothing happens! Yet because of some tacky horror movie, kids were bricking themselves during halloween by stupid dares like that!
Perhaps if the scenario was slightly different....if it wasn't a button, but the trigger of a gun, and the person who was due to die was right in front of me & the gun, then that WOULD be a different matter, but as for the button iteself? Press press press, and claim the money off the idiot who thought I was gullible!!!
Everyone who uses this train of thought is completely missing the point of this thread. I realize some people are more grounded in reality than others but what I am asking you to do here is suspend your disbelief for one second and pretend that the button actually works. When you push that button, somebody in the world magically dies a horrible death. You are included in this lottery. What you are supposed to do is question how moral your really are. How much do you care about other human beings? The chances of you or somebody you know being killed are astronomical but the person that dies could have had a wife and family that's going to miss them. Nobody is trying to trick you in this scenario it's a question of morality.
Damien the Pigeon: Really? Would you really push it, most of the people in this thread? I know that a lot of you guys are joking, but I want to know how many people would really do it.
Think about it, it's $100 for a human life. Some paper in exchange for a person. There's no way.
Of course I'd push it!
Because it WON'T ACTUALLY KILL ANYONE!
It's a scientific experiment that tests morality. No-one gets killed at all, because the button is not actually attatched to a weird lottery/doomsday device.
If scientists were to conduct the experiment in real life, they'd need to factor in whether the subject is gullible enough to believe that the button will work. - It's like urban myths or superstition...believing something that someone else insists is the truth. Ever said "Candyman" in front of the mirror 5 times? I have, and guess what...nothing happens! Yet because of some tacky horror movie, kids were bricking themselves during halloween by stupid dares like that!
Perhaps if the scenario was slightly different....if it wasn't a button, but the trigger of a gun, and the person who was due to die was right in front of me & the gun, then that WOULD be a different matter, but as for the button iteself? Press press press, and claim the money off the idiot who thought I was gullible!!!
That's not the question that is posed in this thread, though. You have added a lot of extra background there. The poll stated that there IS in fact such a button, and it poses the question "would you push it?" That's it. There may actually be an experiment like this, but so far as the OP is concerned, this is not it.
Actually, no. I haven't included any additional background. The scenario is, you're in a room. There's another guy and a button. You are told that if you press the button, someone in the world will die. Nothing more, nothing less.
As I said, elaborating on the variables will produce different results. Say it was for a dollar, or for $1m dollars. Say it was a case that if you DIDN'T press the button, you would be killed...or a friend or relative.
The question may be hypothetical, but the experiment, to me, is not about morality. It's about gullibility.
I've based this on a famous experiment that actually did take place.
In this experiment, the subject was placed in a room, with a button, and a voltmeter. The subject was told that in the next room, there was someone sitting in an electric chair, with electrodes taped to their body. The scientist in the room with subject would tell the subject to press the button. Each time the button was pressed, the voltage would increase.
During the experiment, the subject could hear the person strapped to the chair, and when the voltage got really high, the subject would hear the screaming. At some point, the screaming would stop altogether, and there would just be silence from the next room.
What was of interest to the scientists was the high percentage (something like 78%) of the subjects tested continued to press the button even though the screaming had stopped, and there was no longer any sound coming from the other side of the wall, and when the levels of voltage were considered lethal.
Of course, the person in the next room was an actor. Nobody was hurt in the experiment. However, the subject didn't know that. There was no offer of money. The subject was merely following orders.
A few people stated that they continued to press the button because they strongly believed that the setup was...well..set up, and they were right. However, of the people who were fooled, only a minority stopped pressing the button when they became concerned at the person on the other side of the wall. The vast majority kept on pressing.
I am not a violent or morally corrupt person by nature, but I confess that if I didn't know it was an act, I would have probably been in the majority. Anyone who reckons they would have stopped is either a saint, or is delusional. The experiment proved that a) People will do anything if commanded, as long as they can defer responsibility on someone else (i.e I pressed the button because the Scientist told me to!), and b) People really are gullible!
Now, I know that for the purposes of a debate on a computer games forum, I'm asked to suspend my belief for a sec. My tuppence worth is that I don't buy into all this "No, I wouldn't press the button because it is morally wrong" crap that a lot of people are saying. Because it is a hypothetical question, it is an easy (& obvious) moral answer, and unfortunately, people seem to have fallen into that trap. Besides, the topic would be boring if everyone said the same thing!The same people who would wish for fairness & justice, but who would rather switch over the TV than watch a charity appeal for the starving in Ethiopia. Hypothesis vs. Reality are two very different things!
Just imagine...REALLY imagine, that for a moment, you ARE actually in that situation. That tomorrow, you are sitting in that lab instead of at work/school, and you actually have to make that choice. Even the most moral of us human beings would be tempted & consider pressing the button.
In my answer, I am acknowledging my fallibility as a human being. I'm not a saint. If it turned out that my assumption was wrong, and someone did actually die as a direct result of my actions, you bet I would feel guilty. However, at least I'm not pretending that I am a model citizen & morally untainted....or a hypocrite!
Actually, no. I haven't included any additional background. The scenario is, you're in a room. There's another guy and a button. You are told that if you press the button, someone in the world will die. Nothing more, nothing less.
As I said, elaborating on the variables will produce different results. Say it was for a dollar, or for $1m dollars. Say it was a case that if you DIDN'T press the button, you would be killed...or a friend or relative.
The question may be hypothetical, but the experiment, to me, is not about morality. It's about gullibility.
I've based this on a famous experiment that actually did take place.
In this experiment, the subject was placed in a room, with a button, and a voltmeter. The subject was told that in the next room, there was someone sitting in an electric chair, with electrodes taped to their body. The scientist in the room with subject would tell the subject to press the button. Each time the button was pressed, the voltage would increase.
During the experiment, the subject could hear the person strapped to the chair, and when the voltage got really high, the subject would hear the screaming.
What was of interest to the scientists was the high percentage (something like 78%) of the subjects tested continued to press the button even though the screaming had stopped, and there was no longer any sound coming from the other side of the wall, and when the levels of voltage were considered lethal.
Of course, the person in the next room was an actor. Nobody was hurt in the experiment. However, the subject didn't know that. There was no offer of money. The subject was merely following orders.
A few people stated that they continued to press the button because they strongly believed that the setup was...well..set up, and they were right. However, of the people who were fooled, only a minority stopped pressing the button when they became concerned at the person on the other side of the wall. The vast majority kept on pressing.
I am not a violent or morally corrupt person by nature, but I confess that if I didn't know it was an act, I would have probably been in the majority. Anyone who reckons they would have stopped is either a saint, or is delusional. The experiment proved that a) People will do anything if commanded, as long as they can defer responsibility on someone else (i.e I pressed the button because the Scientist told me to!), and b) People really are gullible!
Now, I know that for the purposes of a debate on a computer games forum, there's a lot of debate going on. My tuppence worth is that I don't buy into all this "No, I wouldn't press the button because it is morally wrong" crap that a lot of people are saying. Because it is a hypothetical question, it is an easy (& obvious) moral answer, and unfortunately, people seem to have fallen into that trap. The same people who would wish for fairness & justice, but who would rather switch over the TV than watch a charity appeal. Hypothesis vs. Reality are two very different things!
Just imagine...REALLY imagine, that for a moment, you ARE actually in that situation. That tomorrow, you are sitting in that lab instead of at work/school, and you actually have to make that choice. Even the most moral of us human beings would be tempted & consider pressing the button.
In my answer, I am acknowledging my fallibility as a human being. I'm not a saint. If it turned out that my assumption was wrong, and someone did actually die as a direct result of my actions, you bet I would feel guilty. However, at least I'm not pretending that I am a model citizen & morally untainted.
Ok, the point of this thread was not to see how gullible you are. It really is about morality. I want you to pretend that the button does actually kill somebody and you get $100 when you do. You know this for a fact when given the choice. You're making this more complicated than it is.
1. It never says you won't be the one to die. 2. It never says where the dollar bill lands,could be in your toilet. 3. The button may be a trap. 4. Loved ones could die.
But still,rig it up to a machine,and if dollars spawn in same place,make a bag.
No, a life is worth more than money. If the people I inadvertently killed deserved it, then no harm done. But the thread says random, for all you know it's someone close to you.
Actually, no. I haven't included any additional background. The scenario is, you're in a room. There's another guy and a button. You are told that if you press the button, someone in the world will die. Nothing more, nothing less.
As I said, elaborating on the variables will produce different results. Say it was for a dollar, or for $1m dollars. Say it was a case that if you DIDN'T press the button, you would be killed...or a friend or relative.
The question may be hypothetical, but the experiment, to me, is not about morality. It's about gullibility.
I've based this on a famous experiment that actually did take place.
In this experiment, the subject was placed in a room, with a button, and a voltmeter. The subject was told that in the next room, there was someone sitting in an electric chair, with electrodes taped to their body. The scientist in the room with subject would tell the subject to press the button. Each time the button was pressed, the voltage would increase.
During the experiment, the subject could hear the person strapped to the chair, and when the voltage got really high, the subject would hear the screaming.
What was of interest to the scientists was the high percentage (something like 78%) of the subjects tested continued to press the button even though the screaming had stopped, and there was no longer any sound coming from the other side of the wall, and when the levels of voltage were considered lethal.
Of course, the person in the next room was an actor. Nobody was hurt in the experiment. However, the subject didn't know that. There was no offer of money. The subject was merely following orders.
A few people stated that they continued to press the button because they strongly believed that the setup was...well..set up, and they were right. However, of the people who were fooled, only a minority stopped pressing the button when they became concerned at the person on the other side of the wall. The vast majority kept on pressing.
I am not a violent or morally corrupt person by nature, but I confess that if I didn't know it was an act, I would have probably been in the majority. Anyone who reckons they would have stopped is either a saint, or is delusional. The experiment proved that a) People will do anything if commanded, as long as they can defer responsibility on someone else (i.e I pressed the button because the Scientist told me to!), and b) People really are gullible!
Now, I know that for the purposes of a debate on a computer games forum, there's a lot of debate going on. My tuppence worth is that I don't buy into all this "No, I wouldn't press the button because it is morally wrong" crap that a lot of people are saying. Because it is a hypothetical question, it is an easy (& obvious) moral answer, and unfortunately, people seem to have fallen into that trap. The same people who would wish for fairness & justice, but who would rather switch over the TV than watch a charity appeal. Hypothesis vs. Reality are two very different things!
Just imagine...REALLY imagine, that for a moment, you ARE actually in that situation. That tomorrow, you are sitting in that lab instead of at work/school, and you actually have to make that choice. Even the most moral of us human beings would be tempted & consider pressing the button.
In my answer, I am acknowledging my fallibility as a human being. I'm not a saint. If it turned out that my assumption was wrong, and someone did actually die as a direct result of my actions, you bet I would feel guilty. However, at least I'm not pretending that I am a model citizen & morally untainted.
Ok, the point of this thread was not to see how gullible you are. It really is about morality. I want you to pretend that the button does actually kill somebody and you get $100 when you do. You know this for a fact when given the choice. You're making this more complicated than it is.
Actually, I'm playing a bit of a Devil's Advocate here. I love a good debate, and this is an interesting subject.
As I said in my last post, the question is hypothetical. The reality is very different.
The obvious answer that is expected off anyone is "No, I would not press the button because it is morally wrong" blah blah blah. I am merely calling 'bullshit' on all those people who haven't thought about it, and just plumped for the good and easy answer. Yes, I may be making it more complicated than it actually is, but I'm damned if I'm going to provide an obvious & elementary answer just because you are demanding one from me.
At least in my replies, I demonstrate that I have actually thought about it, weighed up my own fallibility, and considered the variables. I may have set myself up to be flamed, but at least I have provided a sensible, reasonable and realistic answer to the posts.
1. It never says you won't be the one to die. 2. It never says where the dollar bill lands,could be in your toilet. 3. The button may be a trap. 4. Loved ones could die.
But still,rig it up to a machine,and if dollars spawn in same place,make a bag.
1. Oh well. I die. Game over. 2. They would overflow eventually :P 3. Couldn't possibly see that coming, nobody would blame you. 4. I don't love very many people, the chances of that are miniscule. And even if they did: meh, I'd get over it. Most people wouldn't though.
trelloskilos: 2. Let's apply Pascal's theorem to this situation. Draw up a 2x2 grid. On the one side, write: Push & Don't push - On the other axis, write Bluffing & Real. In each box, write the pros & cons of pressing the button according to how the criteria play out. - You will see that in this scenario, anyone would press the button. Someone already applied this to Global warming, and Pascal infamously applied it to the existence of God.
It's called Pascal's "Wager", and it's a joke. It's assumes a dichotomy and equal probability and doesn't account for unforseen consequences. Although it can be used here because hypothetically, we're assuming there are only two options with definite outcomes.
riskroWe: How many of these threads have to be made before you get it through your skulls that human life is intrinsically worthless?
Can anyone point out the contradiction in terms?
What? 'Intrinsically worthless'? That works... And that doesn't mean I don't value your opinions enough to want to change them. Intrinsic, I said. Meaning that I don't care if some random stranger dies.
Not for a $100. What if it's my girlfriend, or my mom, or me? Though if it were my dad, or my sister, or my girlfriends parents, or my government teacher I'd press it without needing reimbursement. Err. This makes me seem like an awful person. They're awful people, trust me.
I'm not. I would push it!
A few reasons why:
1. I do not believe that any scientific setup would ever allow this. I also don't think that a single push of a button would actually kill someone.
2. Let's apply Pascal's theorem to this situation. Draw up a 2x2 grid. On the one side, write: Push & Don't push - On the other axis, write Bluffing & Real. In each box, write the pros & cons of pressing the button according to how the criteria play out. - You will see that in this scenario, anyone would press the button. Someone already applied this to Global warming, and Pascal infamously applied it to the existence of God.
3. Someone has already mentioned the butterfly effect: What if that random person was destined to save your life? Or was your soulmate? - My answer to that is, how many lives have you already affected by your own everyday actions (or inactions)? Are you guilty of turning over the channel whenever there is an appeal for donations to help Ethiopia? Have you ever waved a friend or a relative goodbye as they go off to Iraq or Afghanistan? Did you think about anyone else when you bought that last can of beans from the supermarket? Maybe you pressed the wrong button in an elevator, and as a result, someone was late for work, rushed in the roads & died...The butterfly effect is continuous. You may have already killed someone just because of any decision you made in the past!
4. Finally, here's the main crux of the matter. Let's change a variable. Let's say that if you pressed the button, you'd get a dollar & a random person would die, but if you DIDN'T press the button, a friend or a relative (or you) would be killed instead in their place. What then?
Everyone who has played the moral high ground on this subject has decided to fall hook line & sinker for this scenario. I haven't. I do not think I'm morally reprehensible for saying that I would press the button. Given the situation, I would genuinely press it. - Change the variables though (less money, or that the person who dies would be murdered in front of me), and I probably wouldn't.