C&P- Dilemma- should you cut your coat in half for anoth

The Grim Squeaker · Post by **The Grim Squeaker** » 2006-01-25 03:05pm

Shamelessly ripped from Crime and Punishment and the capitalistic would be suitor [S' something, can't find the book, And it was not Svidrigailov]:

You have a warm, skintight fur coat, and are out in the winter waiting for a bus (Which will not arrive for at least an hour), while standing next to you is a total stranger without a coat [Whi is obviously poor, freezing and slightly drunk].
Would you:
A) Keep the coat on yourself- better for one to be warm than both to freeze.
B) Cut the coat in half, so that both of you are freezing.
C) Give the stranger your coat thus freezing yourself.

Would your answer change if you were told that only the person wearing the [full] coat will stay alive due to the -43c temperature?.

My answer would be selfish in both situations, since like the suitor I would say [To myself] "Better for one man to be warm than both to freeze", since the coat would be mine earned out of my own money, sweat and labour and cutting it would lessen the effect, barely helping anyone.
I suppose that this makes me a selfish bastard, since I prescribe to pragmatism over emotion of charity but I did always like Ayn Rand

's "Atlas Shrugged", although I would let him have the coat for a short while before the bus came [Not earlier due to fear of him stealing the coat].

Faqa · Post by **Faqa** » 2006-01-25 03:09pm

A mere lack of comfort? I'll split time with him on the coat.

Life-or-death? Take a guess. Sorry, but I like being alive.

Seriously, though, DEATH, what happened to "rotate shifts in the coat"? It's certainly a reasonable option.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-01-25 03:27pm

If both of us are going to be freezing if the coat is cut in half, then what's the point, except to make two people miserable? Plus, if the guy's drunk then it's
at least a partial explanation why he doesn't have his own, so he can rot.

The Grim Squeaker · Post by **The Grim Squeaker** » 2006-01-25 03:32pm

Seriously, though, DEATH, what happened to "rotate shifts in the coat"? It's certainly a reasonable option.

Why should a drunk wino give you an expensive fur coat back in -43 degrees celsius?

A mere lack of comfort? I'll split time with him on the coat.

No cheating

, if you give him the coat he get's it for good, this:

although I would let him have the coat for a short while before the bus came

comment was a RL one, in the scenario you can't give him the coat for anything less than a permanent time.

Plus, if the guy's drunk then it's
at least a partial explanation why he doesn't have his own, so he can rot.

The situation is suppsoed to be in 18th century Russia, the poor were poor back then, and even today Alchohol is regarded as a "warmer" and is an excellent warmer and trouble eraser for most.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-01-25 03:34pm

DEATH wrote: The situation is suppsoed to be in 18th century Russia, the poor were poor back then, and even today Alchohol is regarded as a "warmer" and is an excellent warmer and trouble eraser for most.

Which you didn't bother mentioning in the OP.

Faqa · Post by **Faqa** » 2006-01-25 03:38pm

Oh. OK, screw him. I'm not giving up my expensive coat for a random wino who'd probably just sell it for booze later.

Boyish-Tigerlilly · Post by **Boyish-Tigerlilly** » 2006-01-25 05:29pm

This isn't hard. The OP states that if you keep the coat, one person is saved. If you give him the coat, one person is saved, and if you get rid of the coat, two people freeze.

There's no point in giving the coat to someone else unless that person is some vasty important figure. Not knowing any of his life/importance to society, sacrificing yourself to him would make no sense. You are merely exchanging 1 for 1, and doing so would be a violation of the principle of equality consideration of interests. You are not to do something that would sacrifice something to yourself of equal or comparable moral worth.

If you divide the coat, I am assuming you both will die, right? If someone's going to die, that's a net utility loss. None of the choices are actually selfish, since you are considering the interests of utility. One living is better than two freezing to death, and one for one makes no sense if one is going to die anyway.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2006-01-25 05:37pm

Wino gets no help from me.

There are shelters for that. If you can't get in there, then odds are, my coat won't make a damn bit of difference.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2006-01-25 05:41pm

Boyish-Tigerlilly wrote:This isn't hard. The OP states that if you keep the coat, one person is saved. If you give him the coat, one person is saved, and if you get rid of the coat, two people freeze.

There's no point in giving the coat to someone else unless that person is some vasty important figure. Not knowing any of his life/importance to society, sacrificing yourself to him would make no sense. You are merely exchanging 1 for 1, and doing so would be a violation of the principle of equality consideration of interests. You are not to do something that would sacrifice something to yourself of equal or comparable moral worth.

If you divide the coat, I am assuming you both will die, right? If someone's going to die, that's a net utility loss. None of the choices are actually selfish, since you are considering the interests of utility. One living is better than two freezing to death, and one for one makes no sense if one is going to die anyway.

You seem to be glossing over one of the options here. If you give him the coat, you're the one who winds up freezing while waiting for said bus. So either way someone dies or suffers a lot of bodily pain.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-01-25 05:44pm

Solauren wrote: There are shelters for that

In 18th century Russia? Methinks not.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2006-01-25 05:47pm

Batman wrote:
Solauren wrote: There are shelters for that
In 18th century Russia? Methinks not.

Which then makes no sense with the OP. Unless Buses were in 18th century Russia as well.

He only stated 18th century Russia as an aftereffect. Likely where the original scenario was from.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-01-25 06:01pm

Ghost Rider wrote:
Batman wrote:
Solauren wrote: There are shelters for that
In 18th century Russia? Methinks not.
Which then makes no sense with the OP. Unless Buses were in 18th century Russia as well.
He only stated 18th century Russia as an aftereffect. Likely where the original scenario was from.

Granted. Come to think of it, I fail to see why this happening in 18th century Russia would be important anyway. A lot of people in this day and age can't afford a warm coat (leave alone a fur one) through little to no fault of their own.
I withdraw the complaint.

drachefly · Post by **drachefly** » 2006-01-25 06:37pm

Anyway, if he's drunk, he could die even with the coat on. Drinking lowers your resistance to the cold even as it raises your perceived resistance to the cold. So, the wino might even eventually TAKE OFF your coat and freeze to death. Which would just be dumb, but that's what you get for handing your coat to someone with a BAC of 15%.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2006-01-25 07:42pm

Buses in 18th century Russia? Okay. This wino can rot. What the hell is he standing out in the cold for? There's no bus worth dying for, especially when it hasn't been invented yet.

mr friendly guy · Post by **mr friendly guy** » 2006-01-25 07:42pm

If you want to "cheat", can't you argue it depends on how long it takes the bus to arrive. If you give him the coat, and the bus arrives soon, you will be reasonably warm inside the bus. If the bus drops close to your house, then you can get inside and not freeze to death.

However in the spirit of the dilemna, fuck the drunk. Its not my fault he is too stupid to not cover himself up in such temperatures, or stay indoors (which you do not need an expensive fur coat for).

Its either my life or his, and if you are going to argue from a "number of years of life gained" perspective, chances are this guy's behaviour will just lead him to commit more stupid acts. Hence its not likely we will gain many years of life for my act of "valor", while if I kept my coat, I am likely to retain many more years compared to him.

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2006-01-25 07:48pm

Is the model for the drunken wine guy "Marmalov" (or something similar to that; he was the perpetually drunken husband early on in the story, and Sonia's father, who kept on wasting his opportunities to better his life)?

Although the above is not a major influence, in 19th century Russia, I'd be hesitant to give my coat to the drunk. The coat isn't likely to prevent him from freezing to death that night, and most likely, he'll just trade it as soon as possible to buy some more wine. You'd probably be doing him a greater favor by simply giving him some money so he can spend the evening in a bar instead of freezing his ass off.

Zero · Post by **Zero** » 2006-01-25 07:53pm

I had missed the bit that whoever lacked the coat would die. Why give up my life for some miserable drunk? I do give people shit of mine if they need it, and it's only a minor inconvenience of some kind to me, but I imagine I'd do a bit more good then some drunk anyways.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2006-01-25 08:26pm

Another idea: you could (ugh) huddle up close to the drunken smelly hobo and keep him alive. I guess I might if I saw him start to truly suffer.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

C&P- Dilemma- should you cut your coat in half for anoth

Which option in the first scenarion would you choose?

C&P- Dilemma- should you cut your coat in half for anoth