If you had to kill 1 million people to save 10 million people would you do it?

That depends on who the 10 million people were.

I can't answer with a simple Yes or No. There are too many variables.

If I could choose the people, I would most likely let the 10 million people die.

depends on the situation honestly. Are you talking 1 million random people for 10 million random people? one country vs another? 1 million of a specific people vs 10 million specific people? (as in race/gender/whatever) Or that I have to choose 1 million people to save 10 million more?

On the first one, (random) I would do it... and would accept the punishment for what I did. (and actually hope that I would be amongst those that were sacrificed)

On the country one it would depend on the situation... too many factors to just say yay or nay.

On the race/gender/whatever one... no, that I would not do.

and on the final one... I would try for volunteers and would choose myself as one of those who would die... Other than that it would depend on the situation.

I do know that if the decision had to be made, I would try and do what was needed and would accept the consequences of my actions. The thing is... If you are the one who has to make the decision on 1 million vs 10 million, the decision is yours to make. I may be a monster, but I know that if I had to I would do what is needed no matter the cost to me. (Note that this is a hypothetical situation where it is either or... in real life there are more things to take into account.)

No. And I'll tell you why. Quality of life doesn't measure in numbers. Who am I to determine which of the 1 million are to die? Why are their lives not as important? This obviously doesn't work in a military setting since the military is volunteering to serve for the benefit of others. But just randomly killing 1 million people? I'm sorry that 10 million have to die, but I'm not going to tell 1 million people that their lives simply are not worth as much and shoot them in the head.

easily no. Wether a million or 10 human beings it relatively is morally incorrect to kill human. i does not elect the two and prefer that each person in basic terms drop weapons (or maybe if motives such question to stand up), as a effect shop all a million million plus 10. one in all Paulo Coelho's e book, The devil and omit Prym, have supplied a deep perception and a conceivable answer to such question. attempt to study it.

i would Gather together the 10 Million People and we would go Discuss and Negotiate with the 1 Million People.....

AND if the Negotiating did not Work out.... us 10 Million People would have Us 1 Million Prisoners~!

It depends on the circumstances really. How would they have to be killed and what would be the benefit of saving the other 10 million, besides its obviously a larger number. Would be a hard desicion but ultimately I think it may have to be done.

No. Somewhere in that 1 million people is someone, or a team, smart/creative enough to help solve the total problem. This, in turn, give us more time to work the issue, and everyone goes home at night.

All are saved because the few were spared. Thanks.

********************

Your numbers don't work. It takes a long time to kill a million people. Meanwhile, it only takes a split second to kill a single person. So, your little ethical paradox is nullified by its own ridiculousness.

I would ask for volunteers first. Some may want to end it all from having enough of this life. I would lean towards the perverted martyrs seeking virgins first.

The 10 million deaths wouldn't be my fault. The one million deaths would be.

I would be guiltless.

It's a bullsh!t question. And no, I wouldn't. And none of that 'collateral damage' BS.

@you know who you are... you ought to be ashamed of yourself! well.... maybe the lawyers ;-p