Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Randomise it.There are 6 people in line to receive experimental artificial hearts. However, thanks to budgeting concerns, there are only 3 artificial hearts to give to these people. If a person does not get an artificial heart, they are likely to die within a year. Whom among these would you give an artificial heart? Why them and not the others?
Male 1: A war veteran with two children that came out homosexual after his service. 35 years old, otherwise good health.
Woman 1: A housewife with five children, and a living spouse. 46 years old, and has diabetes.
Male 2: A delinquent that has been in juvenile facilities for stealing, yet is a successful student. 16 years old, otherwise good health.
Woman 2: A former prostitute with one child, and no other family. Currently works as a nurse. 27 years old, and a sufferer of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (not usually deadly, but weakens the immune system).
Male 3: A retired heart surgeon, widowed with no children. Currently runs a charity organization for lung cancer victims and their families. 68, suffering from osteoporosis and high cholesterol.
Woman 3: A former police officer that had to retire early due to being shot in the spine while on duty, is married. 38 years old, and is a paraplegic.
Ok, in addressing responses such as this, there are practical reasons this is an unreasonable solution in real life. Mostly, the shear number of people that have failing organs and would need a transplant that would not survive the surgery. With such limited resources, you have to make them count for all that they worth, and keeping the process random will not accomplish that.Randomise it.
Then develop an indices of worth and score each person. Highest wins.Ok, in addressing responses such as this, there are practical reasons this is an unreasonable solution in real life. Mostly, the shear number of people that have failing organs and would need a transplant that would not survive the surgery. With such limited resources, you have to make them count for all that they worth, and keeping the process random will not accomplish that.
Then develop an indices of worth and score each person. Highest wins.
What do you think I did? Problem is, what is worth what? Is what a person could do for society worth more or less than their physical health? This is when things get tricky.Then develop an indices of worth and score each person. Highest wins.
Indeed.What do you think I did? Problem is, what is worth what? Is what a person could do for society worth more or less than their physical health? This is when things get tricky.
Normally, it is groups of people and it is taken to a vote to prevent individual bias from winning out.Indeed.
That's why I said to randomise: if the choice of who gets the transplant is that close, why let the choser's bias play a part?
One could make several different scoring systems and randomly chose which system to use.Not a bad idea, but people would argue all day long on how to value the scoring system.
Because female life IS weighted more
- that is why it used to be a universal code to let women and children live while the men fight.
Or, women (and children) are the first hostages, for example, to go free.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?