Posted July 21, 2019
low rated
GameRager: What if the stuff being lost was truly important and one had to choose between the two...like say in an outlandish example one thing was the cure for a major diasease that wasn't backed up or easy to replicate vs. saving a handful of people? Which would you choose to save if you could only save one? The few people or the potentially large numbers that cure/research could save in the future?
Easy, the net profit in human lives is higher if you choose the cure. Also, you could sell the cure and make tons of money while saving more lives than in the first scenario. It's the better alternative from every angle. I'm probably going to capitalist hell for even thinking about turning a cure into profit after sacrificing lives to get to that cure. But it would probably be the most efficient way either way in the long run.
Post edited July 21, 2019 by user deleted