[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Again, your twisting my answers and leaving my reasons out and you still have not chosen between the boy and girl. I saved the Pandas on the basis that you said ALL the pandas. Given the population of rats that would remain I would choose to save the Pandas. Tie twice as many humans instead of the rats and I would give the exact same answer. The panda would be extinct, there would still be umpteen billion people on the planet. The other was a choice on preference of species, nothing to do with whose life has more value. Again, boy or girl, your choice. It's a trick question.

No it's not a trick question.
Besides, isn't preference just another word for place greater value upon?

1 boy vs 1 girl, the outcome is 1 death. So in the context I'm asking it is irrelevant, as the outcome is issentially the same, though it may offer some insight into which I assing more value to, but not necessarily.

I asked you

1 person vs 100 rats
The outcomes are
1 death vs 100 deaths

if you Truely think all living things are equal then you should easily be able to choose to let that 1 person die to save 100 rats shouldn't you?
However, if you pick the person, then you cerainly are doing it becaue you think that that one life is of greater value than the 100 that were the other option.