For my son, husband(not at the moment though), and little sister . . . then yes, for anyone else, probably not.
What about the reverse? Would you let someone related to you to die if it meant you could live?
Is that really the reverse? It is implicit in the original question that choosing not to sacrifice yourself will cause you to live and them to die, so it sounds like the same question to me.
I agree with this.It would depend on how unpleasant the death was! But conceivably there are one or two people I'd die for.
They'd better do something important with their lives though!
When answering this question, I also need to consider the consequences of either person's death.
If I died, how many others out there who need my help, either on a personal or professional level, would have to suffer? Could I have much more to offer to the world? Could I save or change more lives for the better or for the worse? Is all that worth my sacrifice?
I can see a degree of selfishness about it all. Is it selfish that I choose to live so that I can fulfil my personal agenda to help others - something that is not even guaranteed, and which could backfire spectacularly? Is it selfish that I throw it all away and die in a state of personal contentedness to help just one person regardless of the countless others who could benefit from me?
How would I react if I lived and the other person died? Would I be full of remorse over the death of the loved one I should have saved, that I just stop everything I do and enter a prolonged period of mourning? Or will it add a new-found drive that I've been given another chance at life?
All of the above of course also applies to the other person in question, whether they lived or died instead of me, and whether they would do the same thing to me.
If I had no time to think about it, though. then I'd go with my gut instinct. I feel that the point about living with the knowledge that I denied someone's continuing life, so that I could further my own, would have a great effect on me and would haunt my every decision afterwards. Rather than consider their sacrifice as a gift and a means to drive myself further, I'd still see it as a burden in that they could have done something with their life instead of me (though there is still no guarantee of this). Therefore, my default answer, with the best of intentions, is still YES.
Yup.I'd like to think I would. I hope I never have to find out.
What about the reverse? Would you let someone related to you to die if it meant you could live?
Well, in this scenario, I am obviously envisioning that my sacrifice is necessary to buy time for my friend to go on and save the world from imminent destruction.No. I like life too much.
I suppose one could argue that just means I don't have anyone I consider sufficiently close to me to make the answer yes, but that's really getting into semantics.
My 89 year-old grandma entered Hospice care a few weeks ago. The sister's idea of pain management and the healthy dose of morphine aren't in the same state. I am firmly convinced that the Hospice nuns euthanized my grandma by their dosing recommendations. And I thank them for it, because Grandma died in her sleep, in her own house, with her son and daughter-in-law at her side, and her dignity intact.It would depend on how unpleasant the death was!
I hope I would have the courage to sacrifice my life to save a child (even if it wasn't someone close to me).
I've always felt the same, I'd lay down my own life to save anyone younger than me.
For my nephew or my nieces--- yeah, I probably would.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.