Wow this really isn't a easy topic and I think there is no complete and correct answer. The first and spontaneous reaction I had was: of course all people are worth the same. But this thought shattered immediately.
I started to ask myself why should the worth of a person be determined by other people. This leads to a much deeper question with which humans deal since they exist. Why are we here? What is the purpose of live? Is there a God?
The world does not consist of black and white. But I don't deny it, who would not act like this in the given situations.
Humans are not perfect. We don't now every fact about a person or a given situation. We would act the way we thing would help us or the majority the most or would harm the less.
Nice and deep article! I thought about it a long time. Actually we discussed themes like that a lot back in school. In ethic class.
There was one thought experiment: A train is about to crash into 5 men who are working on a railway. You could pull a lever to change the direction of the train but then it would hit one men.
Most people would do it right?
What if the one man would be a child? Quality over quantity?
Or you change the circumstances: You are standing on a bridge. A fat person in front of you. You could push this person so that he or she would fell on the railway and stop the train. Where is the difference in pulling a lever or pushing a person either way just one person dies and 5 could survive?
Even though I don't have an answer on all of this I will never forget the questions...
Thanks for a meaningful comment, I'm glad you like the article!
Nice thought experiment. Let me try to answer question by question.
The train example is more complex than it seems on the first thought, I really like it. : )
Yes, 5 lives are usually more valuable then 1, but: those 5 men are working on a part of the railway where a train is scheduled to pass by (I suppose), while that 1 isn't. So, it could be their mistake, or the mistake of someone who was planning their work schedule. Hell, I could even end up in jail if I would pull the lever and change the direction of the train to a non-planned direction, killing a man in the process! Thus, if I had enough time to think, I would probably not pull the lever. But, what if it was 100 vs 1, or 1000 vs 1, or whole human race except me and the 1 vs the 1...
Now let's focus on quality over quantity. It's impossible to accurately calculate, but if I would be able to choose without any legal consequences, I would try to save the life/lives that has/have the most total potential for enjoyment and positive impact on the world. : )
As per the bridge twist, I think that the difference is in the fact that it's harder to do something bad to someone more directly than more indirectly (pulling the lever while alone in a train cabin vs looking in the eyes and pushing off the bridge).
It's easy to estimate human value in very clear situations such as the ones that I provided in the article, but in reality the vast majority of the situations are probably much closer to your examples.