- #36
leto
- 30
- 0
I would pick myself because I would never give up. Presuming I knew I was going to die regardless, I would choose Einstein because I would expect that choice to make the world a better place for people I cared for. I would not do this because I felt that either life was superior, but because I want to act in my best interests as an empathetic human.If Einstein, you and Hitler were on a boat. Let's say you knew you were too weak to survive, but had the key to a lifeboat that could save precisely one of the remaining two people. Who would you pick? Or would you flip a coin?
The idea that different lives have a different value in some greater scheme strikes me as absurd. Our existence is mysterious. The scales we use to measure someone are always based on our self-interest. They are especially useful when we wish to rationalize killing.The idea that men are all equivalent in some mysterious cosmic sense strikes me as absurd when viewed in this light.
He would be a faster runner. You could only say that he is a superior human being if you believe running fast is a trait of a superior human being. Someone else could believe the slower human being was superior if he believed that running slowly was a superior trait. While this probably seems absurd to you, wouldn't it be feasible to suggest the slower runner was able to observe more detail before he moved on? Where is it, exactly, that the faster runner needs to get to so fast?for all intents and purposes other than running they are the same human being), the one who sprints faster than the other should be considered superior as a human being logically? Or not?