Question of your moral judgement

[Calpal]

i guarentee im older than you child

this dude is bound and determined to be right haha..

 

[drknght]

I wouldn't have time to think about it twice, not even to flip a coin, but obviously I would go and save the kid. If we think about life as of a downhill slope thing, then the kid should be saved because he's standing higher. The purpose of the life is not just to live it as long as we can. Old sick and dying man won't do anything good to us. Not even his money. REMEMBER!!! Wealth does not come from money or gold itself. Wealth comes from work! We can turn everything we have into gold and we can be in Midas's position, but we have to get our lazy asses to work. Giving money for free makes things worse. Look at EU countries. They got the money from EU and look how terrible they ended up.

Let the kid live.

 

[Anorien16]

One side we have practicality where the donation would help to mitigate similar situations (If the hospital had enough money there would be TWO doctors) and another path tempered by pity . . . . . . *Sigh* I would treat the person who has the greater chance of survival.

 

[YowYan]

On paper, I want to say the man because his money will end up saving more lives. But in practice i would probably choose to save the child.

My thoughts on paper

 

[Stencil]

The child, I'm assuming that the man is middle aged, meaning the kid still has experiences to go through when the man has already had his fair share of life. Also, why would you take the risk of having the man rescued when he may not even donate the money?

The kid, obviously.

 

[Argle]

assume the child would never recover from traumatic brain injury (he did get shot in the head) and save the man.