What would you do?

This is a classic moral situation, one I picked up from a poster at my school, so I thought, what the hell...

A situation occurs, your walking down you local street just after visiting some friends, you know you ate too much ice cream, but it was so good! However, you're disturbed by a shrill scream from down the road and the sight of black smoke rising in the air. You mover closer and see a burning building.
You can't see any emergency services and a large crowd continues to gather.

You look at one of the windows and you see the person you care about most struggling in the flames. You're stunned and are unsure what you can do, however you rush in the entrance and try to rescue them. Through the burning hot flames and choking smoke filling your lungs, 2 rooms appear. One shows your friend stuck on the other side deep in flames certain to be ingulfed by fire soon. Whilst in the second room, a doctor cries out for help, they claim they have the knowledge to finally cure cancer and save millions, if not billions of lives.

And.... you realise you have a choice. Save the person you care about the most or the person who could cure cancer that has affected the world deeply, saving many, many people.
You have time to only save one, the other would be killed by the time you rescued the other.
So... what would you do?

 

Oh this one's tough. You can't save both in any possible way?

 

Save who i love, the doctor can save himself

 

The one you love - I'm sure more people will soon discover the cure to cancer anyway, but you can't replace your loved ones.

 

Yeah, a medical degree means you can survive burning buildings.

If so, no need to make this thread.

If it was that easy to discover the cure for cancer, chances are it would have been done by now.

I would save my loved one. Simply because cancer hasn't had a direct effect on me so the loved one would have the more emotional appeal.

 

Definately the one I loved. I wouldn't even stop to consider saving the doctor, much less ratoinalize it. But considering the odds that that specific doctor found the cure it's pretty unlikely, he'd probably have been lying anyway just for you to save his skin.

 

Save the loved one.

Better to sleep at night, with a loved one, rather than the cure.

The cure can wait, even with it, it'll probably be too expensive (I think it might be using stem cell research) for the general millions who need the cure.

 

The doctor of course. Millions of lives are worth much more than one. If I saved my loved one they should be extremely pissed that I did for them to have ever deserved my love in the first place.

I love how you're all looking for ******ed half-ass reasons to save your loved one instead of millions of people. But I'm sure your loved one will be much more grateful than that nameless cancer patient times thousands you just saved.

 

Although 'irrational' and 'sick', I would save a loved one. Cancer has affected me in many ways in my lifetime, but I really wouldn't be a hero and lie to you all and say the doctor because it's the right decision.
Choosing to save the doctor probably is the right decision, but in dire situations, morals and selflessness is totally thrown out the window for any human being.
We aren't saints, so why make out that you are one?

 

Right, because you choosing one option makes it human for everyone to choose the same. Like I said, ******ed half-ass reasons.
Also, some people are saints. That's why there are saints in the first place. They sanctified a number of dead guys just a month ago.
Why overgeneralize? Why say everyone will react the same way? Why not just say "being without my loved one scares the piss out of me"? You just make your rationale sound all the feebler.

 

Oh, no, it doesn't.
But many people, and you sir might be one of them, choose the better option just because it's the better one. Do they think of what they really would do in that situation? Or are they just going with the path that makes them seem better than they are, or different to others?

I'm going to ignore the fact you use the phrase '******ed half-ass answers', as it makes you look quite childish and immature that you can't comprehend others opinions on a matter, and choose to describe them in such a stupid way.

 

I admit that I was a bit quick to judge. It all depends on whether you still have time to think or not. I suppose the humane impulse would be to save the one you love and leave the other one to die. Fair enough. However if you still had time for consideration, even a handful of seconds, you should have concluded that the happiness of several millions weighs more than your own. You really don't have to be a "saint" to realise that.

That being said though...

Yet you didn't. Pot kettle black. :p

Read the others' replies, especially the ones I quoted (and yours) and see for yourself what kind of asinine reasons people give to (further) justify their choice. At least be honest with yourself and don't try to come up with any actual reasons to not save the doctor. You know they won't make sense. You said yourself that saving him would probably be the right thing to do. ;)

 

At the time i would choses the one i love because you can't replace love but i had enough time to think....
i would still chose the one i love

 

I'm sure the family of those cancer patients feels the same way, hun. And yes, you can replace love. It's childishly naive for anyone to think that they can't. What you can't replace is life. Sure, nobody's 100% irreplacable, but millions of folks sure are one hell of a lot less disposable than your boyfriend.

 

Honestly I'd choose the Doctor. I'd rather be able to save more people and have them grateful but at the loos of love which can be replaced as Styx said

 

Firstly, the loop hole: The doctor should have made records or be working with others. The cure should still be around. Also, if one man is so close to making the breakthrough, it should be easy for another to make the jump, especially if I whisper in an ear or two that the guy in the building had the answer.

Now my answer: Whichever benefits me most. What's the chance of me getting cancer? What's the chance of anyone I know getting cancer? Will saving the doctor give me a mention in the history books, or will I be ignored as soon as I get the guy out of the building? Will I even get appreciation for my deed? Will I feel more weight from the sacrifice of the friend, or the loss of the cure?

Weighing it up, I think saving my loved one would be a better option. They need not know that the cure for cancer was their opponent. I just happened to save them at risk of my own life.

 

The one I love... I'd just hope the doctor'd be bluffing... >.>

 

The doctor. Not to be too cheesy, but

as has been said before. A cure for cancer would save countless lives, not just for the millions who have it now, but the billions in the future who would have died from it. Besides, I don't have any real attachments anyways.

If he were bluffing, I'd kill him myself and no jury on Earth would dare convict me.

EDIT:

My aunt got breast cancer not long ago, and my grandfather died of a different cancer. I think another one of my relatives got skin cancer once too, but I don't remember. So, curing cancer would save more of my own family than getting one person out of danger once. Hell, if he got trapped in a fire once, he could get into trouble again, and I might have no way to help him.

 

Styx, please stop? Please? Everyone has their opinions, so just state your point and leave it at that. There's a fine line between discussion and just refuting opinions, and while I do understand where your point comes from, I can't say that everyone is as analytic as the next person.

At least they are contributing. We can't expect everyone to create an elaborate essay on things, because most people just post their input and leave it at that. The first post gave a choice, so let's at least respect other's choices. No matter how feeble they may be. (unless it's spam)

Now, for my choice...

If I had to choose, then we'd probably all burn due to my hesitation. But ignoring that detail, let's say I could react.

I wouldn't really wish to see someone I loved get burned, but thinking about the children, and the lives devastated by cancer. I'd probably hurt me, but I'd choose the doctor...

Now, I'm not that good of a person, but if the person burning was a loved one, then I'd know for a fact that they'd be glad I saved thousands from cancer.

Why? Because, love is not something you give to just anyone, and in my case, I'm sure that someone I'd love would be noble and of high morals. If I truly loved the person, then I'd love him enough to know that he would want me to save thousands...

So yeah, I know my reasoning isn't the greatest, but that's what I think.

EDIT: Gahhhh. This is a day old (-_____-) don't mind me Styx, but at least take to mind my request, if only slightly.