Death has became bored again and decided to play another game.
He has came up to you and told you this.
There’s two guys right now. You need to choose which one dies.
The first guy killed thousands of people in the past, however in the future is going to reform his life and become a millionaire helping homeless people.
The second guy is a millionaire helping homeless people, however in the future will kill thousands of people
Who would you kill?
I choose the second guy to die, and maybe steal his wallet after he dies.
My logic here is that I’m preventing a crime rather than punishing a guy who has already committed it.
I choose for no one to die
But if I had to really choose… I guess I’d kill the second guy too.
I kill the second.
It’s easy to say that the first guy “deserves” it more, but if I kill the first and spare the second, I’m consigning thousands of people to a death that could have been prevented, and denying all those the first will help in the future all the benefit that would grant them.
Second.
Sure, the first has done terrible things, but he will help people later
The second has done good things, but by choosing him I am preventing thousands more people from dying.
Without context, this question seems so simple. But for every story there’s another side to it. Like in
purgatory, a guy who ran over a lady was sent to hell because a guy didn’t bother reading anything else. However what the guy didn’t know was he ran over an old lady who was a nazi when he was trying to go back to a charity program he started and when his car started to malfunction (if I remember correctly)
I choose to sacrifice myself instead of one of them, both have done so much good that I can’t ever reach that.
