Devil's advocate

Problem statement:
Suppose you are driving through a narrow tunnel and a worker falls onto the road in front of you. There is not enough time for you to stop. If you keep straight, you will hit the worker and kill him, but if you swerve left into oncoming traffic, you will collide with the school b and kill at least five children. You hit the worker. 

You are dead somehow and these four people are deciding whether you be sent to hell – an opportunistic businessman, a sociopathic serial murderer, an unscrupulous politician and an aam aadmi.
Here is my story:

A moral side 

Murderer: This man should sent to hell as he murdered a innocent worker and didn’t even think once before doing such cruel, brutal thing.

Businessman: No! No! I beg to differ from you sir, but you are not considering that he didn’t have enough time to think at that moment. He just put the simple logic of ‘one over five’. We are discussing about his fate so it is not right to take such a judgemental decision. Even in the business, we think first about the side where loss would be less, don’t we? So I think this man is not guilty as you are accusing him.

Politician: Gentlemen, I didn’t like that you are discussing about what choices he had. Simple thing is- he had murdered one of the citizens from my constituency and he deserves to rot in hell. If you are not with my opinion and going to allow him in heaven then I will arrange a protest march in front of god’s home. (After all I should speak like I do really care about my citizens.)

Aam admi: Before you proceed respected juries, I would like to hear his side as you are giving opinion without giving him chance to explain.

Me: Thank you sir. As you know that I was driving in a tunnel and suddenly a worker falls on the road. I had only two choices- go straight and kill worker or kill five children. I am not going to tell you that I choose ‘one over five’ as said by one of you juries. I am not going to put a price-tag on a person’s life as it is not my right. Here I am giving a situation and just want to know that what you would have done in that situation. Shall I continue my lords?

Murderer: No! Absolutely no! All my fellow juries, I m surprised by his courage. He has murdered someone and without giving justification he is asking us question. This is ridiculous. He has chosen a working condition man over five children who were not benefiting the society. They are just burden. He killed a man who was working for welfare of all.

Businessman: I would like to hear about his strategy to deal with that situation, similar to removing employees in time of recession. So my vote is ‘yes’.

Politician: I am a leader and leader always stands on the shoulder of voters. So I want to give him a chance. My vote is ‘yes’.

Aam admi: As Voltaire said,”Even if I disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to death your right to say it.” So my vote is ‘yes’.

Businessman: Gentlemen, here are three votes in his favour. So young man, continue what were you saying-

Me: Thank you so much, my lords. Here is my situation- Imagine you are a doctor. You have five patients waiting whose treatment you have done earlier. All of them are in serious condition and needs one organ in order to survive. First one needs heart, second one needs liver, third one needs brain, forth needs kidney, fifth one needs pancreas. You are expert in organ transplanting. Now a very young and healthy man comes to your hospital to routine check-up. So my question is- what will you do in this situation? You are having two options. Either you check that man and see those five men living miserable life where they are counting their days to hug the deathbed or else you have another option- you could give injection to man to lose his senses and remove all those five organs from him and transplant them to those five men. So I repeat what will your decision in this case?

Murderer: You can fool these people with your evil logic but I am not going to change my decision.

Businessman: I am going to answer this question. I will choose second option as I am giving life to five people instead of one. I stated my ‘one over five’ logic earlier. It is also according to ‘cost-benefit analysis’ theory.

Politician: I am not going to answer this question as it involves murder by me. I have very clean image among people and am not going to malign that for some silly, stupid question. You are sounding like Arnab Goswami. My simple answer is “No comments”. (Why should answer if I have not any benefit, neither politically nor monetarily.)

Aam admi: Young man, you are very smart. You have put us in exact same condition as you were in. I think it is about ‘karma’. In this situation, the healthy person has nothing to do with whether other five persons were going to live or not. If I was a doctor, I would have only check that man as it is my duty as a doctor. I am a doctor not God Vishnu to operate the world.

Me: Now my lords, there is a tie. Two of you answered my question and two of you don’t. So how can I believe that you are able to decide my fate when you are not able to answer my simple question? So my lords, please answer my question and after that whatever decision you would give that will abide to me.

Murderer: I am going for first option but I am not going to explain my side. (Anyway, I choose this because it involves death of five people or even slow death. These people never gonna know that..haha)

Politician: (vote share is greater in first side so why should I waste my vote…After all I am a politician.) With due respect to all juries, I am with first choice but don’t ask me for explanation as media is going to make hype of this issue.

Aam admi: (After discussing with all juries) so now the decision is taken. 1st option has 3 votes and second option has 1 vote. After discussion, we come to the solution that, “Life is matter of choices. Destiny has put you in the situation where there are very few choices available in front of you. You had chosen the best according to your self-conscious. So we are sending you to heaven. Enjoy.”

Me: (Eyes full of tears) thank you juries. Even if I haven’t believed in judiciary system on Earth, but you guys failed me. My faith in judiciary system is restored now. Thank you so much from the bottom of my heart for your kind decision.”

~Digvijay Sanjay Patil