What's Your Measure Of Evil?

[David Sklansky]

My jury posts and PTB's replies made me think about this question. Similar to others but more precise.

You are a general who must make some decisions to save the world. Putting some men in harm's way. No volunteers can be asked for. No votes from your men either. Your last mission can be accomplished in three different ways:

1. You can send ten men who will all definitely die. (You can't pick them at random. The mission will fail if you do.)

2. You can send 50 men. Eleven will die for sure but you don't which ones.

3. You can send 100 men. There is a fifty fifty chance that exactly 24 will die. Otherwise they all live.

No more missions coming up. Which do you choose?

[FortunaMaximus]

1.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
My jury posts and PTB's replies made me think about this question. Similar to others but more precise.

You are a general who must make some decisions to save the world. Putting some men in harm's way. No volunteers can be asked for. Your last mission can be accomplished in three different ways:

1. You can send ten men who will all definitely die.

2. You can send 50 men. Eleven will die for sure but you don't which ones.

3. You can send 100 men. There is a fifty fifty chance that exactly 24 will die. Otherwise they all live.

No more missions coming up. Which do you choose?


[/ QUOTE ]

Number one seems logical, but since the expected death rate is pretty close in all scenarios, then I would give my men the choice of which they would prefer. I'd put it up for a vote, explaining that the mission will save the world.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
My jury posts and PTB's replies made me think about this question. Similar to others but more precise.

You are a general who must make some decisions to save the world. Putting some men in harm's way. No volunteers can be asked for. Your last mission can be accomplished in three different ways:

1. You can send ten men who will all definitely die.

2. You can send 50 men. Eleven will die for sure but you don't which ones.

3. You can send 100 men. There is a fifty fifty chance that exactly 24 will die. Otherwise they all live.

No more missions coming up. Which do you choose?

[/ QUOTE ]

If it's saving the world none of those factors come into consideration, the mission comes before any wellbeing of the men.

Just a nitpick.

If they all will equally succeed, I think
a) if you have a ww2 russian style army
b) standard US army
c) the Alexander the great heroic army or maybe US special forces types.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]

Number one seems logical, but since the expected death rate is pretty close in all scenarios, then I would give my men the choice of which they would prefer. I'd put it up for a vote, explaining that the mission will save the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

you've been demoted to garbage scow captain.

[remi983]

Assemble 100 men in the room and randomly select 10 of them to pursue the mission. This way less people will die and the general doesn't have to face the difficult decision of specificaly choosing troops for a suicide mission.

[David Sklansky]

That's what chezlaw would say too. Even though I pretty obviously wasn't allowing that answer.

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
This way less people will die and the general doesn't have to face the difficult decision of specificaly choosing troops for a suicide mission.

[/ QUOTE ]

dude, generals live for moments like this.

[remi983]

If that answer is dissallowed, 3 is the way to go. Especially if the men will have the opportunity to skew the odds of survival in their favor; ie better trainning, weapons, mental sharpness, etc.

[flipdeadshot22]

I would assume just going with the option that minimizes the casualties, which in this case would be option 3.

1) 100%
2) 22%
3) .50(100) + .50(76) = 88 survive => 12% casualties

Or am i missing the point here?