forsake the last guy
do not forsake the last guy
3 "good" men yet none choose to sacrifice themselves to save the others?
More like 3 selfish soon to be dead men
the kobayashi maru dilemma
is there a way to cheat it here?
it is virtually impossible to determine what one would do in a situation like that, until actually faced with a situation like that
you can say you would do this or that, but no one really knows
there are hundreds, maybe thousands of such scenarios, and until it hits you in the face, you really have zero idea
“Most of the shadows of this life are caused by standing in one's own sunshine.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Everyone dies. Better to die without the stain of murder on one's soul. I would not throw anyone overboard, though I would do everything possible to survive, and keep everyone alive, for as long as possible.
They all die.
At the end of the day, someone is going overboard. You can draw straws, play rock paper scissors, king of the raft, whatever, but two men live, one man dies. Mankind survives. These questions arent as difficult in real life as people want them to be. The 'noble' thought of all three dying together is just plain stupid.
The answer is actually a lot simpler than people would think; if no option exists to save them all then the fewer that die the better.
Since the decision maker does not appear to be one of them and does not seem to have any connection to any of them then the choice making here is a lot easier moral-wise, and there should be no moral concerns for picking one randomly and letting him go. After all morals are relative to the situation and it is never immoral to pick the most moral choice of those available.
If the decision maker was one of the three or had connection to one of them - then things get confusing.
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."