User Tag List

First 311121314 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 138

  1. #121
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Synarch View Post
    I was talking about this with sanveane a while back.

    If you had to choose who would die:

    1. You or a random person?
    2. You or 10 random people?
    2. You or 100 random people?
    3. You or 1000 random people?
    4. You or 1 million random people?
    5. You or 1 billion random people?

    Be honest.
    i choose the option on the right every time.

    and i'm even more inclined to choose the option on the right as the numbers get higher.

    there are too goddamn many people.
    we fukin won boys

  2. #122
    Senior Member Moiety's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Posts
    6,020

    Default

    It would heavily depend on what kind of death we would be talking here. I'm not a fan of excruciating pain, but if it was quick and painless I have no problem in saying I would always sacrifice myself. Yeah...some jerk could be living in my stead....but I could also be saving the life of someone good and/or innocent.

  3. #123
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    Can someone explain "I don't want people that I know to die" attitude ?
    It's a result of the in-group/out-group mentality. Once you come to know someone, you're aware of their existence, of their preferences. When you don't know them, they're just a random face in the crowd. People feel a stronger attachment to those they know because they've invested something in them cognitively, attempted to understand them and their preferences on an individual level, created a mental "map" of their personality, elevated them beyond the level of a random face through association and familiarity.

    Technically speaking, people you know are not necessarily more valuable than ones you don't. But you will perceive them as having more value due to familiarity and the fact that your prior attachment to them means they have more influence over your life and emotions than a person you don't know, due to the way human sentimental attachments work.

    The question is irrelevant for me, because while I would always pick strangers to die over people I know, I don't love anyone that I've known enough to choose their life over mine. I might sacrifice my well-being temporarily if they needed it, but not my life.

  4. #124
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sytpg View Post
    It would heavily depend on what kind of death we would be talking here. I'm not a fan of excruciating pain, but if it was quick and painless I have no problem in saying I would always sacrifice myself. Yeah...some jerk could be living in my stead....but I could also be saving the life of someone good and/or innocent.
    are you a good person?
    if yes:

    - sacrifice self -
    50% chance to save a good person, 50% chance to save a bad one + 100% chance to destroy a good person
    add up the chance for the most good to be saved
    50 + 0 = 50
    divide the maximum potential outcome [good or bad] by the result
    200 / 50 = 0.25

    25% chance for optimal salvation of the good

    - sacrifice someone else -
    100% chance to save a good person + 50% chance to kill a good person 50% chance to kill a bad one
    add up the chance for the most good to be saved
    100 + 50 = 150
    divide the maximum potential outcome [good or bad] by the result
    200 / 150 = 0.75

    75% chance for optimal salvation of the good


    the answer is pretty clear to me - that is, the randomness can be cut through by factoring yourself in the equation.
    you should save yourself.

    but that doesn't sound as altruistic does it?
    so no one says that.


    it changes when you add more people to it though, but not by much -- if it were 10 other people then it would have to be [50 * 10] good + [50 * 10] bad , and yourself 100.
    that makes for 1100 as the maximum potential outcome.

    still though, if you're a good person, then it tips the scale, just not by such a huge margin.
    we fukin won boys

  5. #125
    Senior Member Yloh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Socionics
    ENFj
    Posts
    191

    Default

    You know what, it also depends on the age of the person who is taking answering this question. Not only that but their believes and value systems would play a big role on their answer as well.

    If I was really old then sacrificing my life wouldn't be as big of a deal because I would of lived a long life. Being young, I would at least go to step 3. Step 4 and 5 really depends on what is going on with my life at the moment.

    Now my beliefs and value system, as a Christian, would tell me that there is no greater love that to loose one's life for another. Believing that, I could even die for one random person.

    This is a very difficult question. My selfish side would at least go to step three or even four with no difficulties, but my selfless side would die for even one person. It just depends on how I was doing when this happened.

    Overall, if I had to pick NOW, I would die for one person. I don't think I would be able to live with myself if I was responsible for so many deaths. One person can mean the world to many other people. One person can have the power that millions can't do.

  6. #126
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocap View Post
    are you a good person?
    if yes:

    - sacrifice self -
    50% chance to save a good person, 50% chance to save a bad one + 100% chance to destroy a good person
    add up the chance for the most good to be saved
    50 + 0 = 50
    divide the maximum potential outcome [good or bad] by the result
    200 / 50 = 0.25

    25% chance for optimal salvation of the good

    - sacrifice someone else -
    100% chance to save a good person + 50% chance to kill a good person 50% chance to kill a bad one
    add up the chance for the most good to be saved
    100 + 50 = 150
    divide the maximum potential outcome [good or bad] by the result
    200 / 150 = 0.75

    75% chance for optimal salvation of the good


    the answer is pretty clear to me - that is, the randomness can be cut through by factoring yourself in the equation.
    you should save yourself.

    but that doesn't sound as altruistic does it?
    so no one says that.
    You assume that 50% of people are good and 50% of people are bad.

    Not saying what you posted is wrong, you are definitely looking at figuring it out correctly, but the percentages are iffy.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  7. #127
    Senior Member Moiety's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Posts
    6,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocap View Post
    are you a good person?
    if yes:

    sacrifice self - 50% chance to save a good person, 50% chance to save a bad one + 100% chance to destroy a good person

    average result of 25% chance to save a good person.

    sacrifice someone else - 100% chance to save a good person + 50% chance to kill a good person 50% chance to kill a bad one

    average result of 75% chance to save a good person.

    the answer is pretty clear to me.
    save yourself.
    but that doesn't sound as altruistic does it?
    Well, Fe and group mentality are not my forté. And yes, the subjectivity of "being good or bad" plays a part in it. I'm more geared towards the individual. So yeah, my use of Te there was an exaggeration. You can't objectively rate people as good or bad. But I think fear of responsibility plays a part in this too...by dying I would not have to deal with the consequences of my actions.

  8. #128
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    What if one assumes there's a good chance that another person is better? In other words, does not consider himself/herself a good person?
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #129
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackCat View Post
    You assume that 50% of people are good and 50% of people are bad.

    Not saying what you posted is wrong, you are definitely looking at figuring it out correctly, but the percentages are iffy.
    alright, i shall substitute the appropriate percentages when i'm given the correct figures.

    because i don't know eveyone, nor have i decided whether even the people i do know are good or bad, i can only be objective by inputting even odds for both sides.

    also, you could look at it this way[this is my preferred outlook] - it's a guarantee that 50% of the people are good and 50% of the people are bad. the metric by which a person can be judged good or bad varies depending on the the rest of the pool.

    that is, the limbo bar might raise/drop depending on the deeds of everyone.

    like say for instance we have everyone at exactly 0 [0 good, 0 bad] and everyone steals something except 1 person.
    that one person would become good, by virtue of the sins of everyone around them.
    the same rule applies if only a single person steals, and everyone else doesn't.
    that one person is bad, and everyone else is good, assuming we all started at 0.

    the point is, i either don't know who's good and who's bad, and have to use even odds [what else could i use?], or there is always a precisely even amount of good and bad people.

    as i see it, there's no other way to make this kind of determination, if the concern is saving good and destroying bad.
    we fukin won boys

  10. #130
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    What if one assumes there's a good chance that another person is better? In other words, does not consider himself/herself a good person?
    then they ought to sacrifice themselves.
    the outcomes switch.

    but then, a bad person is probably going to save themselves anyway [if selfishness is a part of being bad].

    it should be pretty clear that if you're human, you're probably lying if you say you'd sacrifice yourself.
    we fukin won boys

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] Ethical Question: Under what conditions would you kill someone?
    By Crabapple in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 07-30-2007, 09:54 PM
  2. Would you eat laboratory grown meat?
    By sdalek in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-02-2007, 01:46 PM
  3. What kind of essays would you prefer to write?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-16-2007, 03:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO