1. Female
2. Child
3. Physician
4. Poor
6. Family
7. Poor

1. whoever is youngest
2. child
3. this one isn't even worth answering
4. Neurosurgeon unless it's Ben Carson /s
5. wealthy
6. my family
7. Would depend on the wealthy person , I'd save Buffet over 20 plebs
8. I got family who have polar opposite political views so would just choose on the basis of how much I like them.

Hmm , maybe I hate poor people.

First I would only care about keeping ones with original traits and those able to perpetuate my breeding. Numbers matters too.

This post was edited by Saucisson6000 on Sep 23 2019 12:46pm

1. Wouldnt intervene
2. Child
3. Physician
4. Neurosurgeon
5. 5 wealthy people
6. My family
7. Wealthy business owner
8. Someone who agrees with me

Its all driven by a combination of feelings and thoughts on whos existence is more beneficial for humanity

1.: if the female is hot, I'd probably save her. its one life of a stranger that will be taken and one life of a stranger that will be rescued either way, but if I save the hot female, I might get laid. if she's ugly, I wouldnt intervene since it's a situation where I couldnt make an objetive difference.

2.: depends on the age of the adult. if he's 50+, I'd probably save the child. if not, i would probably not intervene. killing off the adult could have a negative impact on more people who depended on him/her than the death of the child. so an expected remaining lfiespan of 60 years vs 80 years (20y/o adult vs child) would not be enough for me to outweigh this consideration, but if it's 30 remaining years vs 80 (50year+ adult vs child), then it would.

3.: physician, but how the fuck am I supposed to know that person A on the tracks is a physician and person B is a burglar?

4.: tough one. the neurosurgeon might make a bigger positive impact by saving ill people's lives, but there's a good chance that out of the 5 poor people, at least one of them will do good things if I save him/her now. so I would probably choose the 5 poor people. that way, only one family loses their loved one instead of five families...

5.: indifferent, would not intervene.
6.: my family, and it's not even close.
7.: the 20 poor people.
8.: would not take action. but again: how the fuck am I supposed to know the political views of two strangers?

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 23 2019 08:59pm

Save my wife and child over all. Save kids over adults.

it's not meant to be realistic, i'm more interested in how you evaluate which lives are more valuable

persons I love > persons I know > strangers

persons who can be expected to have a positive impact on the lives of others > persons who wont make a difference

many persons > few persons

young > old


but as example 2 shows (I specified it since you quoted me, might want to reread my clarification), I also think that there's a moral threshold associated with intervening in any of these situations. in scenario 2, this threshold is bigger than the difference in "value" I would see between a 20 year old and a child.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Sep 23 2019 09:06pm

Not directly related to the examples in the OP, but I'm wresting with my own considerations about the worth of life with respect to largely unresponsive children with congenital or developmental disorders, or traumatic brain injuries. Specifically with kids who have seemingly no quality of life. Like this, as an example: