... that wasnt the goal of the question, which was obviously meant to question our value systems.
It was?
Did you write the OP?
How do you know this?
In any case, as I specifically said earlier in this thread, my answer will not give a clear indication of my value system as it is stated -- that was one of my original issues.
Also... what does this have to do with "conventional" values? Basically, my "values" might look like "values" but they're pretty reasoned... "Let's see: I'm hanging on a rope, it only holds four, I'm the last one, it makes sense for the most people to live, hence I let go." Change the situation -- I am #4 on the rope -- and I'd be telling the guy BELOW me to let go.
It says nothing about what I think of HIM/HER as a person, nothing about what I think about life. It's a reasoned decision, and the value of my own particular life or another particular life is not really something I am taking into accord. I calculate the dynamics of the problem, then do what I think "makes sense" regardless of my "values." It's less a "sacrifice" and more an "efficient solution to the problem, proving best-end results."
And since all these details IMPACT what I see as the "most probable BEST end result that maximizes life for everyone involved," the details matter in terms of deciding what happens. The truth is CALCULATED in real-time, based on the situation specifics, not imposed over it by a prior valueset.
Does that answer the values question?
Since the whole scenario is imaginary, I just imagine a second helicopter.
I'd imagine myself sitting at home in front of the TV in bunny slippers and drinking an espresso.