Moral Dilemma: What would you do?

in #society7 years ago (edited)

This is an open question for all readers. I hope that anyone who responds will take the time to give a well-considered answer. I really look forward to seeing them!

Imagine you are living with a group of other people on an island, which you all arrived at due to an unfortuitous event (eg: shipwreck, exile of dissidents, irreparable ship...). The island has fresh water, plants and small and medium animals, with no predators that pose a threat to humans. It is beautiful, relaxing and has a large forest, beaches, and an extinct volcano that is no longer on a fault. The fishing isn't great, but you can get some fish and other seafood daily. You may assume, if you wish, that you have the limited resources that were aboard the vessel that brought you - what you could salvage, anyways, which means that you might have the engine of the ship, or at least its parts, plus anything else that a large yacht would have, but the ship is irreparable. Unless you chose the exile scenario. ;)

The island is extremely isolated and it is not feasible to leave the island because the sailing distance is too far for the kind of boat you could produce on the island without a great deal of risk of death along the way. There is no way to communicate with the rest of the world and the island is far from shipping lanes and other traffic. For the purposes of this philosophical question, consider that you are cut off from the rest of the world, that the rest of humanity is gone, or some similar scenario that prevents outside solutions. You are, in other words, limited to the solutions available on the island and amongst the people who arrived with you.

Amongst the people you live with, there is a doctor, a nutritional expert, 2 scientists, an expert in architecture and building, 3 chefs, entertainers, and a variety of other people. The range of professions is fairly good for a community of such a comparatively small size. As a result, it isn't hard for all of you to adapt to life stranded on a remote island. You quickly learn how to take advantage of the local flora and fauna, and build a life for yourselves on the island. The group is remarkably well-suited for life on the island, really. Almost as if someone planned it...(mwahahahahaha)

Years pass. The experts in your group have surveyed every inch of the island and the waters around it, mapping everything and setting into motion what limited production they can. They have made what advances they can technologically, given the limitations of an island built by lava, coral, plants and time, but there is no way to remove yourselves from the island due to the limitations, or to call for help, let alone get it. It is a very harmonious situation and everyone works for the greater good - after all, there is no need for capitalism and free market systems when cooperation works so much better and trade is impossible.

Amongst these people, there are some extremely intelligent, talented and dedicated people. They have been working together to try and ensure the long-term survival of the group, thinking in terms of up to hundreds of years instead of the usual 1-5. You live in a meritocracy and everyone must participate for the betterment of all. Slacking isn't tolerated. Physical and mental health are extremely important, and the medical and psychological doctors work hard to maintain that in concert with everyone else, so the environment is carefully protected from pollution through numerous strategies. Some people have formed families and babies have been born.

You are the nominal leader of the group, through meritocratic considerations for such a position, and it is your sworn responsibility to consider all input from everyone on the island, and weigh it all very carefully. You must then suggest the best courses of action based on the data available to the entire population, at which everyone can make their final recommendations, share any additional data and options that have become available during the post-announcement period, which is fairly long, before a final decision is made by you and a cohort of others considered the best for the job.

You have received a very disturbing report compiled by a group of experts from various fields that have been working together on the long-term survival issue. While the island is large and there are a fair variety of resources, there are critical resources that are limited and cannot be produced in sufficient quantities to meet the long-term needs of the islanders at the current population level, much less if that population expands through procreation (yes, sex). Truth be told, you are informed that even if the population were 50% smaller, they cannot keep up with the need for these critical necessities, and suffering will ensue, finally leading to malnutrition, disease and mass death. In other words, even without babies, there will be bad consequences that will most likely end in the collapse of your island paradise, potentially leading to most or all of the people dying. The experts say that if the population is about 40% smaller, at the very maximum, then it is likely that long-term survival can be assured, with generations living here happily. However, they warn that 40% is only if there are no untoward problems, like disasters that might disrupt production or damage resources (temporarily or permanently), so 30% is a safe population size.

In other words, there are too many people living on the island, and no change in that situation will produce the inevitable (!) end result of famine, malnutrition, disease, resource exhaustion, etc...with the final outcome of a collapse or even extinction of you all. You are so shocked that you order the experts to recheck EVERYTHING thoroughly before you start the deliberation process. You are distraught. Amongst the people are many with whom you have close personal relationships with and care about deeply, and this is the norm on the island. Lots of close ties exist. As a result, they spent an additional 2 years researching to make sure they weren't wrong before reporting back to you. In the meantime, you have been making decisions with the possibility of this potential disaster looming on the horizon. The news is stark and unforgiving, and you are struck with illness for several days because of the stress of the burden you bear but, thanks to the help of the health experts, you make a full recovery. Now on to the unavoidable, and completely undesirable, task at hand. Failure to act will reconcile virtually everyone on the island to a slow, lingering death, except possibly those in the prime of their lives who are also very healthy.

At this point, I present two different scenarios. Please respond to both, if you don't mind.

  1. Although, at your age (you're around 60), it is likely that you and many of the older inhabitants will not directly suffer the consequences of the shortages, younger people, including their children, definitely will. You will not see their suffering, but your empathy allows you to imagine what will happen, and it is horrible. You have nightmares about what will happen.

  2. The news is even worse than before. Not only will it happen, but it will happen within no more than 5 years from now. With it staring you in the face, you feel intense responsibility to carefully weigh the options left to the islanders and present the best solutions for consideration yet, since time is so short, you realize you cannot dally.

What will you do?
Here are some possible options, but you are welcome to come up with your own.

  1. Let everyone live life normally and wait and see what happens - deal with it later. (procrastinate)
  2. Hold a randomized population reduction program that must cull 70% of the population. (luck of the draw)
  3. Hold a meritocratic population reduction program that must cull 70% of the population. (the most valuable are saved - no politics)
  4. Meritocratically choose who will be removed from the population, build the best ship possible, and send them off with the hopes that they'll survive and reach a safe place to start over. (playing the odds so more survive overall)
  5. Go on a rampage and kill everyone you think needs to go. (Charles Manson spree)
  6. Spike the drinks and kill off 70% of the population. (Jim Jones move)
  7. Start a blood cult and use that as an excuse to reduce the population. (the rise of the vampires)
  8. Fake an accident involving everyone who reported the problem to you and everyone who knows about it, resulting in you being the only person (in theory) who knows about it, thus removing responsibility from you to make the decision. (deathly avoidance)
  9. Tell everyone to party like its their last days on Earth, until the resources run out and everyone dies slowly, but sooner. (YOLO)

I look forward to your creative solutions. :)



If you appreciate this article, please upvote/like, resteem/share and share it to Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, LinkedIn and wherever else you can!

Sort:  

I would question why, with their ability to construct habitation and presumably tools that they aren't focused on construction of a new vessel (since their original is beyond repair) to leave the island. They obviously have access to means of construction as they have built a habitable community. The fact that their is a shortage of food for long term sustained life only further indicates the necessity of leaving. I would have the people work for the construction of a means to escape. If people were to die as a result of that process and bring population levels down closer to sustainable levels, then so be it. However one can not justifiably choose to kill people, as their is no acceptable selection criterion. Everyone is useful for some reason, even if that reason is not apparent at any one given moment.

I guess I didn't make it clear that the chances of being able to build a ship that could carry them far enough successfully weren't very good. This is a philosophical question, in the end, and the idea is to lay out the framework in such a way to guide people in a specific direction. It is an analogy which I will eventually explain. :)

Thank you very much for your participation! I appreciate it! If you do, too, please upvote the original post.

I already did upvote it. If I comment then I upvoted. :)

Ah, it didn't show that when I looked before. In fact, it only showed that I'd upvoted it. Now there are 38 votes. :) I'm still trying to figure out how to use steemit successfully, as I really need a source of income.

steemit.chat is a real-time chat powered by rocket.chat. So there are rooms like #science and others, where you can post links to your steemit work. Most of us are on there, and use it to discuss and share posts. You can gain your self a lot more exposure by talking to people in real time, and sharing your work directly.

Thanks for explaining! I guess I'll have to give it a go...But now it's time to sleep. :)

Best of luck as you learn. Have you signed up for steemit.chat? If not, that is a good place to promote your work and gain your self more views.

Not yet. How does it work?

This post has been ranked within the top 80 most undervalued posts in the second half of Feb 18. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $4.93 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.

See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Feb 18 - Part II. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.

If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.

Thanks very much! I hope that the credit is due to value I've offered...

Shhh...Don't spoil the surprise ending! ;)

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.13
JST 0.030
BTC 64599.25
ETH 3467.96
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.55