The value of a life - a social experiment.

[DSK-]

I'll say what I always say when someone in the street asks me to give money to charity "Before I help anyone else I will help my family" (including close friends).

Another issue is that I may not see where the money goes. If a homeless person asks me for money and I give it to them, I know they will use it - for their benefit or otherwise. That's their call. Bu how am I supposed to know with charities and people/organisations that ask me for money? how much of it will go to those who need it? how much will be used in 'administration?' and so on.

Life has taught me to look after number one, although I often ignore this mindset for some reason. I guess I'm still of a weak and optimistic mind when it comes to people.

 

[sheogoraththemad]

honestly?
none I don't know this person and he is not my friend, I have some little problems of my own and I would rather give everything to my dad because that's a man I know deserves it.

 

[Kroxile]

I'd give about 5k tops. Then I'd have paid more than my share and let him go beg someone else.

 

[MrStab]

none, this is a completely random person whom i have no reason to care about living or dying they are neutral to me and have no impact on my life.

 

[Wierdguy]

Not a fucking penny - why should I be the one to help him? Why should I be the one to sacrefise for this guy? I have no relation to him so I couldnt care less. If he has no-one else but a complete stranger to help him that means no-one cares about him, so why should I?

 

[aenimau5]

10% max mainly to prevent me from feeling guilty

 

[jonyboy13]

are they part of my monkeysphere? [http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html] no? screw them then.

That.
No good reason to give any of the money and in fact, I should take money from the guy who asked me to give for wasting my time since I'm rich now.

 

[Baneat]

From a utilitarian perspective you could gain many more lives from death's grip by sending money to africa.


Shit doesn't work, and shit isn't fair.

fuck it, none.

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

I hate questions like this with a passion. And it's not a social experiment, it's a philosophical debate. A social experiment would be set up to determine how people react in potential real world situations.

Which brings me to why I have despised these questions since High School philosophy class. Because they are too much. If you have won a million pounds, and are then met immediately by someone who is genuinely and truly at death's door, and you must donate to save them, then look for the cameras because it's being filmed.

And without real world implementation, what is the point of questions like this? It's like people who try and argue that Battle Royale is deep because it asks whether you could kill your best friend. There are such better ways to ask that question that actually pertain to real life that the story ceases to have any meaning.

Another good example is the 'you have control of a train track, a train of orphans are racing towards the scientist with the cure for AIDS, and you have to choose between poor sweet widdle orphans or the cure for AIDS. It's so over the top it has no meaning, you wouldn't ever be presented with a case even remotely similar to that in real life.

Sorry to rag on your question so much but it's one of my pet peeves, and instead of just saying that I thought it was a bad question I'd try and explain why it's not useful. You can't take anything from any answer you give to this that would have a possible real world epplication, and therefore, why ask it when there are much better questions to be asked?

 

[Brightzide]

I personally think Human Life is a totally different currency to regular money. Life can be measured like money though. In numerical value. eg. Saving 2+ people for the life of 1 is beneficial ( providing they're not chavvy wankers ). No value of money can be used to value a person, and though money can help the lives of less forunate people, there are still never any certainties attached. You could donate the entirity of your new fortune, and person X may still die ( it's inevitable anyway isnt it? ). Thus wasting your money. I say, use whatever money you can to help your fellow man...if you are a lovely and valuable member of society. Do not squander it on uncertainty and value your own life, for it is probably just as valuable as the bloke next-doors. Self preservation is an instinct for a reason...Mother nature got it right!

 

[karloss01]

are they part of my monkeysphere? [http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html] no? screw them then.

read the article and i would have to agree.

i wouldn't give anything to him. its going to friends and family first and me second, everyone else is just a paraiste looking for easy money.

 

[Kaymish]

Portion of money given to bedridden scum? ZERO PERCENT
₤1,000,000 is not much money and if i was not well off i would presumably live in a poor community i will need the whole lot for myself and my community
as opposed to some stranger i don't even know and is a single person myself and my community will not miss and besides there are plenty of people more wealthy than the hypothetical me hell the real me is now better off than the lottery winning hypothetical me

captcha after reload because the first one was broken: solution geducl

 

[The Rascal King]

Probably 50%. Generous I know, but it should be enough. I mean what could half a million dollars not fix for person X? If the person only needed food and adequate food supplies for an average person was, say, 10 dollars a day, then that person would be eating good for roughly 135 years. I did my job keeping someone alive, now I can pay for college .....and photoshop.

 

[Icenflame]

It's a very tough question to ask one. And it speaks to many aspects of human nature. I think not knowing person X allows you to make a removed decision. If it was for a friend or a loved one then sure thing.

I'd say 5% they can figure out the rest.

 

[IceStar100]

Hate to say it but 0 zip. I trust no one and can use that money to save people know.

 

[KorLeonis]

HAHA, none, not one single corroded penny.

"Value of life"? Life has no intrinsic value. The life of some random stranger is no more important than the life of the squirrel I hit with my car on the way to work this morning. If I actually got a shit-ton of money, I'd go to some third world country and pay to kill peasants with assault rifles and explosives. I've always wanted to be able to shoot someone.

 

[Adam28]

I would give to charity instead, unless I knew the person or get to know them I am not going to give him anything.

 

[Callate]

It occurs to me that giving a random person a lot of money is a sure way to end up with a lot of random people asking you for money.

If my interest is in saving lives, I can save a lot more lives by giving to, say, a charity that provides medical care to children in the third world or micro-loans to struggling farmers than by giving tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds to one person for medical care.

All that said, I'd probably give around 50,000 because a) I could and b) I'm kind of a soft touch about such things. But then I'd tie the rest up in charities and long-term investments so no one could ask such a thing of me again.

If it costs more than that, they should be asking other people. And frankly, that's a lot of money to save one person's life, especially given just how many lives that money could save.