It’s also arguably the point of Civil War 2 in Marvel Comics, iirc. I think it went something like: Someone named Samson or something is an Inhuman that could see the future, and it’s revealed that characters like Hulk need to be killed or the world ends… Captain Marvel decides to use the kid and end threats before they happen. I think it’s either Captain America or Iron Man (idr which) who is the main opposing force. Turns out, the kid only saw probable futures and I can’t quite remember if it devolved into he manipulated fate and had to die or not… I really don’t remember. I might be mixing the Civil Wars, tbh. Pretty sure Hulk gets killed in one, I think by Hawkeye? Definitely the point was Carol stopping threats before they happen. It’s also arguably the point of some anime. I think there’s a series called something like, How I Became The Demon Lord’s Daughter’s Bodyguard or something, and basically the premise is what it sounds like… the hero party goes and kills the Demon Lord whose last request is his daughter be spared/protected, so the main hero sneaks away with her and raises her. I’m sure some people try to kill her because it’s like, “If she’s allowed to live, she’ll become the new Demon Lord and attack humanity, again!” It’s honestly a semi-common trope.
@@Paradox-es3bl the future-sight kid eventually becomes akin to God and Ascends. His predictions were 100% on-point, they were also just vague as hell and some people saw more than others, so it was all misleading. Like, one of them was Captain America getting killed by Spiderman I believe, except what wasn't shown was that Captain was a Hydra member. That's the one with Hawkeye killing Hulk, yes. It should have been mainly between Captain Marvel and Iron Man. The kid's whole existence was to basically "warn" humanity of upcoming threats or something like that
It's the same basic premise as the Trolley Problem, just on a larger scale. Even if you recognize that there's no real choice, the fact that you're the one making it affects how you would act.
I'm too pragmatic to hesitate on this question. For one, I prefer living over randomly dying. And in regards to other people's deaths it comes down to "do I know them?" - which is much more likely for the thousands than it is for the singular child. And not just by sheer number, even. I don't really know any children. I barely know _of_ any children. So all of my attachments side with the mathematically "correct" choice, making it a no-brainer for me.
As hard as it sounds, the live of one should not be worth the lives of THOUSANDS of others..... That you save your own life on top is simply there to make you feel like its selfish.
thing is, with this one. It doesn't say what the thing killing people is. So maybe, just maybe, you can be greedy enough to save all 1000 people without the help of the button. Therefor also saving the little one
We know for sure that the child is innocent, but we don't know about the other thousands of people. There is also a difference between not intervening to stop your own imminent demise, vs actively taking another life. It's a tough decision, but i think I won't press the button.
Even if bae didn't push the button the child will still die because it really ment that everyone dies even if it harsh 😅😅😅 also even if the child survive the child will be alone because everyone is dead
In this question, it definitely looked bad. Like if you imagine it illustrated or in a movie, you can see them as evil, smiling as they try kill off a child.
Super EZ. If you struggle with such a thing: within that 1000 of lives can include children, probably 200. Also, you don't need to force the values of others onto yourself; you don't need to put a child's life before your own.
Hmm this is an interesting scenario, it implies that the child is patient 0. It could also be a hostage situation, but a nutjob wouldn't spare thousands just to see 1 a child die unless it's part of a vendetta against the childs family.
Myth Bad End, but Ina was still 8yo when AO-chan taking her over, and it involves the entire planet earth ... Ame still hasn't invent the -Portal Gun- Time Machine yet ... So it is up to Baelz to decide ...
The logic is simple but it would be a hard to do in real life because it's easier to do nothing & know the results are a consequence of your inability to do something fucked up than it is to do the fucked up thing & directly see/feel the consequences of your actions. Plus you have to live with the kid's death but you die in the other scenario.
Bae: WHA-? WHY A CHILD!?!?? God: **Smashes the button without hesitation** Mumei: **Doesn't press the button, yet unlives the child on her own** **Dan Dan Intensifies**
This choice is just stopped at, "Can you all fight and stop me, when I want to save the little shit" which is if the child is your family or really care, and you are not included in 1000 unfortunate people. Otherwise, I said press it, and makes sure that 1000 people be grateful for me.
This kinda pops up in Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous, you encounter a few paladins of Iomedae wanting to sacrifice the sweetest most innocent little elf girl who also happens to be a witch, in the misguided belief that the sacrifice of an innocent would give them power to push back the demons, and it also goes against their Goddess' tenants, of course it's all bs, an idea probably planted by cultists of Baphomet.
Interesting question but honestly easier to make when you have no relation to the sacrifice so to speak. Ask the father/mother to make this same choice, I bet those percents change very quickly.
Wouldn’t the child die if you didn’t save them anyway? Either way there’s at least 1 dead kid but in one of them there’s also thousands of other death and in the other option the kid is the only death where is the downside?
To be fair Bae not wanting to is actually correct, when you see they questions popping up, including in real life, it's supposed to be an impossible to answer question because you make yourself God by thinking you know better. It's like would you save your parent or your child, if you answer either one you accept the premise, you have to reject answering the question and try to just do your best when you're faced with it.
I like these sort of questions because for me i think deeply into it. Many would suggest sacrificing that one child to save the others. Some forget if you sacrifice one you ultimately choose to kill someone. You have the bear the consequence of being a murderer and you have to talk to the people of the bereaved one. I mean think of this situation everyone but the child survived running to their beloved ones hugging crying than you see the parents of the killed child looking around in search of their child. Having to break to them that i killed their child to rescue everyone else ... just feels bad
I'm fuzzy on the details because I don't do scary games but there was a game that her and Fauna played a long while back during October that had elements of a child being irredeemably in harm's way, and it shook her pretty badly.
@@MakotoTheKnight It was Edith Finch, baby in the bath, heavy ass subjects, she was an emotional wreck for about half an hour while fauna was comforting her
This is a simple one for me... It's really about the choice to hurt someone vs. just not doing anything, which I don't think is bad. I'm not gonna complicate it with "what ifs" like who's in the 1000 or dealing with a Tiny Hitler in child form. So, if you ask me, my mind's made up. I don't want to become a murderer. Stepping in and doing something feels more in evil to me, while staying out of it, even if it means everything could end badly for me and the 1000 others, is just how I see things.
@@eldon515 The consequences and moralities will belong to those who will hate me for not pressing the button. Since I'll be dead as per the option of not pressing the button, after all. 😅 Plus for questions like these, adding layers to the event that didn't exist in the question is meaningless. In the end, moralizing the ethical choice of choosing or not choosing will always end in either one of two options. In the end, it's a choice of what a person deems as a Good or Evil choice. Right or Wrong.
But have you ever wonder, what if That Innocent child gonna grow up into Hitler🤨🤨🤨 I mean Hitler when He still a child not that bad but the World turn him into that
![Koronesuki Being Too Honest With Their Body Language Made Korone Crack Up So Much [Hololive]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/-pqfybEJlRs/mqdefault.jpg)
![TEEDEE TADA - DIAMOND NARAKORN X LEGO LYKN [Special Dance Performance]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QgtZedFeumA/mqdefault.jpg)
Isn't this the plot of at least half a dozen JRPGs?
Doesn't it usually turn out to be a lie or something?
It’s also arguably the point of Civil War 2 in Marvel Comics, iirc. I think it went something like: Someone named Samson or something is an Inhuman that could see the future, and it’s revealed that characters like Hulk need to be killed or the world ends… Captain Marvel decides to use the kid and end threats before they happen. I think it’s either Captain America or Iron Man (idr which) who is the main opposing force. Turns out, the kid only saw probable futures and I can’t quite remember if it devolved into he manipulated fate and had to die or not…
I really don’t remember. I might be mixing the Civil Wars, tbh. Pretty sure Hulk gets killed in one, I think by Hawkeye? Definitely the point was Carol stopping threats before they happen.
It’s also arguably the point of some anime. I think there’s a series called something like, How I Became The Demon Lord’s Daughter’s Bodyguard or something, and basically the premise is what it sounds like… the hero party goes and kills the Demon Lord whose last request is his daughter be spared/protected, so the main hero sneaks away with her and raises her. I’m sure some people try to kill her because it’s like, “If she’s allowed to live, she’ll become the new Demon Lord and attack humanity, again!”
It’s honestly a semi-common trope.
@@Paradox-es3bl the future-sight kid eventually becomes akin to God and Ascends. His predictions were 100% on-point, they were also just vague as hell and some people saw more than others, so it was all misleading. Like, one of them was Captain America getting killed by Spiderman I believe, except what wasn't shown was that Captain was a Hydra member.
That's the one with Hawkeye killing Hulk, yes. It should have been mainly between Captain Marvel and Iron Man.
The kid's whole existence was to basically "warn" humanity of upcoming threats or something like that
Pretty sure this happened in The Last of Us
and the bible
Ah yes. The Emiya Conundrum.
i prefer to call it "your dream is stupid"
@@mrroboshadow "Hey! No one gets to call my dream stupid except me!"
@@Vejitatheouji "YOUR DREAM IS STUPID!!!"
[ ] Bring Illya back.
[ ] Bring Illya back.
[ ] Bring Illya back.
It's for the greater good.
Everyone: "The greater good!"
We are not the Tau.
"How is this for the greater good?"
@@phyrexian_dude4645 Everyone: “The greater good”
@@ghostshrimp5006 Shut it!
@@ghostshrimp5006 Shut it!
Literally just the trolley problem. lmao
Damn hooligan teens, trespassing on the trolley lines again!
Thank you Bae, you save thousands of LoL players.
I'd trade a thousand scrubs for a second coming of Faker
Villain - Kills the thousands to save the one
Hero - kills the One to save the thousands
Mumei: Both is good :D
Youngling: Master Bae, there's too many of them what are we to do!?
Bae: ...*Ignites lightsaber*
"The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few" ~ vulcan man
Is Vulcan man the same as Sentinel Prime, cos that's where I got the quote from
@@Wan_DerFullSpock said this to Kirk then walked into the Enterprises reactor to save the ship. Got mega radiation poisoning.
I remember reading a short story with a similar premise. And I think Fate/Zero also had something like that.
It's the same basic premise as the Trolley Problem, just on a larger scale. Even if you recognize that there's no real choice, the fact that you're the one making it affects how you would act.
The ones that walk away from Omelas
Bae just did the rumbling just like Eren did, well just different body count 🤣🤣
“in the grand scheme of the multiverse…”
Sorry kiddo
Also this implies some bastard purposefully set up a situation where you and a host of other people will be killed unless you yeet a child
nothing personnel
Better luck next time
skill issue
peace, kid ripBozo
I'm too pragmatic to hesitate on this question. For one, I prefer living over randomly dying. And in regards to other people's deaths it comes down to "do I know them?" - which is much more likely for the thousands than it is for the singular child. And not just by sheer number, even. I don't really know any children. I barely know _of_ any children. So all of my attachments side with the mathematically "correct" choice, making it a no-brainer for me.
The hardest choices require the strongest wills
To quote Shiori " living, its kinda neat"
I guess i'm just evil cause i would press this pretty easily! 😂
This is how I feel playing Pikmin
As hard as it sounds, the live of one should not be worth the lives of THOUSANDS of others..... That you save your own life on top is simply there to make you feel like its selfish.
thing is, with this one. It doesn't say what the thing killing people is. So maybe, just maybe, you can be greedy enough to save all 1000 people without the help of the button. Therefor also saving the little one
The Last of Bae
We know for sure that the child is innocent, but we don't know about the other thousands of people. There is also a difference between not intervening to stop your own imminent demise, vs actively taking another life. It's a tough decision, but i think I won't press the button.
Trolley problem basically.
Literally a question from Frostpunk.
The city must survive.
Even if bae didn't push the button the child will still die because it really ment that everyone dies even if it harsh 😅😅😅 also even if the child survive the child will be alone because everyone is dead
Welp, this trolley doesn’t have any brakes.
out here on that Those Who Walk Away from Omelas shit
joke's on Bae, there is no such thing as an innocent child. Children are monsters, no matter the age.
this is like that nuclear mutant from x-men.
The classic baby hitler question. Jdon my soul
Some Joel and Ellie right here xD
In this question, it definitely looked bad. Like if you imagine it illustrated or in a movie, you can see them as evil, smiling as they try kill off a child.
also known as the baby Hitler question
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. 0
- Obi-wan, probably
Torchwood flashbacks
Oh god Children of Earth was ; -;
compare that to how risu played the game lmfao
kiritsugu moment
I'm sensing "Last of Us" reference
Super EZ. If you struggle with such a thing: within that 1000 of lives can include children, probably 200. Also, you don't need to force the values of others onto yourself; you don't need to put a child's life before your own.
The circumstances will change if the child is worth more to you than the thousands of lives including yours.
Torchwood
It's nice to see so many fans of it in the comments🙈
Basically the plot of ocarina of time
Hmm this is an interesting scenario, it implies that the child is patient 0.
It could also be a hostage situation, but a nutjob wouldn't spare thousands just to see 1 a child die unless it's part of a vendetta against the childs family.
This question demands context, but honestly probably not. Certain death is not specified.
Myth Bad End, but Ina was still 8yo when AO-chan taking her over, and it involves the entire planet earth ...
Ame still hasn't invent the -Portal Gun- Time Machine yet ...
So it is up to Baelz to decide ...
Depends if those 1000 people were assholes or not...
It would be worst if you have to do it with your own two hands too no weapons.
It's pretty simple question with simple answer.
The logic is simple but it would be a hard to do in real life because it's easier to do nothing & know the results are a consequence of your inability to do something fucked up than it is to do the fucked up thing & directly see/feel the consequences of your actions. Plus you have to live with the kid's death but you die in the other scenario.
Bae: WHA-? WHY A CHILD!?!??
God: **Smashes the button without hesitation**
Mumei: **Doesn't press the button, yet unlives the child on her own** **Dan Dan Intensifies**
This choice is just stopped at, "Can you all fight and stop me, when I want to save the little shit" which is if the child is your family or really care, and you are not included in 1000 unfortunate people. Otherwise, I said press it, and makes sure that 1000 people be grateful for me.
This kinda pops up in Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous, you encounter a few paladins of Iomedae wanting to sacrifice the sweetest most innocent little elf girl who also happens to be a witch, in the misguided belief that the sacrifice of an innocent would give them power to push back the demons, and it also goes against their Goddess' tenants, of course it's all bs, an idea probably planted by cultists of Baphomet.
To easy
I wouldn't accept if the child was Jesus but even so, I might fcked up more if i don't save the Thousand🙈🙈😹😹😹
So it's a bargain on making sure Jesus won't die for our sins and EVERYONE is dmaned for eternity.
Interesting question but honestly easier to make when you have no relation to the sacrifice so to speak. Ask the father/mother to make this same choice, I bet those percents change very quickly.
Ozzymandias hero or villain?
Didn't he have a lot of stuff?
What is this Tales of berseria?
Wouldn’t the child die if you didn’t save them anyway? Either way there’s at least 1 dead kid but in one of them there’s also thousands of other death and in the other option the kid is the only death where is the downside?
They might be a thousand evil people though
I don't like that this specifies "innocent" child.
By contrast, this would lead one to presume that the thousands are not.
This is not a hard question. What is she going on about?
To be fair Bae not wanting to is actually correct, when you see they questions popping up, including in real life, it's supposed to be an impossible to answer question because you make yourself God by thinking you know better. It's like would you save your parent or your child, if you answer either one you accept the premise, you have to reject answering the question and try to just do your best when you're faced with it.
I like these sort of questions because for me i think deeply into it. Many would suggest sacrificing that one child to save the others. Some forget if you sacrifice one you ultimately choose to kill someone. You have the bear the consequence of being a murderer and you have to talk to the people of the bereaved one. I mean think of this situation everyone but the child survived running to their beloved ones hugging crying than you see the parents of the killed child looking around in search of their child. Having to break to them that i killed their child to rescue everyone else ... just feels bad
Any American would press this button....
No matter what the first statement say
I don’t understand why she was getting emotional she made the right choice
Classic Bae
Cause GIRLS and FEEEEEEEELINGS.
I'm fuzzy on the details because I don't do scary games but there was a game that her and Fauna played a long while back during October that had elements of a child being irredeemably in harm's way, and it shook her pretty badly.
@@MakotoTheKnight It was Edith Finch, baby in the bath, heavy ass subjects, she was an emotional wreck for about half an hour while fauna was comforting her
@@ghostshrimp5006 Yep that's it, thank you, that's the context here I think
This is a simple one for me... It's really about the choice to hurt someone vs. just not doing anything, which I don't think is bad.
I'm not gonna complicate it with "what ifs" like who's in the 1000 or dealing with a Tiny Hitler in child form.
So, if you ask me, my mind's made up. I don't want to become a murderer.
Stepping in and doing something feels more in evil to me, while staying out of it, even if it means everything could end badly for me and the 1000 others, is just how I see things.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Did you mean you'll pick neither and let things happen?
Hes trying to take out his responsability.
But inaction also have consequences that can held you as the responsible.
@@eldon515 The consequences and moralities will belong to those who will hate me for not pressing the button. Since I'll be dead as per the option of not pressing the button, after all. 😅
Plus for questions like these, adding layers to the event that didn't exist in the question is meaningless. In the end, moralizing the ethical choice of choosing or not choosing will always end in either one of two options.
In the end, it's a choice of what a person deems as a Good or Evil choice. Right or Wrong.
But have you ever wonder, what if That Innocent child gonna grow up into Hitler🤨🤨🤨 I mean Hitler when He still a child not that bad but the World turn him into that
One question: if you can save 999 lives but you choose to let them die, will you still think that isn't bad choice?