What's in a life?

[Streg]

Imagine a madman stuns you and you wake up in an unknown room.
The madman is now behind a safety glass. There's no way you can harm him. In the room there is the Mona Lisa. The real one. If you don't think the Mona Lisa is the most important piece of art of the world replace the monalisa with your favourite piece of art. Even the original manuscript of an ancient book will do, but it must mean something to you (and to the world).
Now, not only there is the Mona Lisa (or whatever you picked), but three human beings. A man, a woman and a child. Probably a family. You do not know.
Imagine there's a gun on the ground. The madman says "It's your decision. You can shoot the three people in front of you, or just the Mona Lisa. If you don't do anything in 5 minutes I'll press this button: we all will die and the Mona Lisa will be destroyed ".

What are you going to do?
5 minutes to think.

[Darkflame]

Obviously destroy the art.
While art can bring people pleasure on mass, the "real" art is only ever going to be experienced for a tiny fraction of most peoples lives, and only then by a fraction of the population.
Most people appreciate it via copies, be it digital or other forms, and those will remain.
So I don't think the lose of any original art is worth more then anyone's life.

Now, maybe it would be harder if we were talking all copies as well. So no one could experience that art in any form again. Its not just robbing people of a "glimpse of the real thing" for a minute or so in a art gallery - its robbing everyone forever of ever seeing it at all.
I think Id still destroy the art, but it would be a far more profound loss I think. It would also put kinda pressure on those people to do something worthwhile with their lives :P

[marcosmapf]

It depends. Would the art be destroyed forever in the world if I kill it? (like, would it be as if it never existed in the first place?)

If yes, then I would kill the Family
If no, I would kill the art.

As Darkflame said, the art can be accessed via copies, so if the original is gone then that's not such a big issue. But in case the art dissapears from existance if I kill the original, then what inspired so many people for so long, what created Jobs, what changed the lives of hundreds, even thousands of people, is probably more important then the random Family right in front of me.

Sorry if I sound too cold, but that's what I believe.

[SpaceGuitarist]

I had the same thinking as Darkflame.

What is your answer, Streg?

[xesf]

Same here.

I've seem Mona Lisa and other original and famous art, but I would rather destroy the art of killing the family.
Imagine by killing the family, you're actually killing a future "Michelangelo"?!
I think we all agree that "screw the Mona Lisa".

What I'm trying to say is that, the family can do more greatness than the actual frame during it's life.

[serializer]

I shoot the madman.

[Bab]

Originally Posted by Streg

The madman is now behind a safety glass.

Originally Posted by serializer

I shoot the madman.

Hum... Safety like bulletproof ? =P

[ChaosFish]

Obviously I shoot the art. Basically what Darkf said.

Also I'd like to add that whoever actually (not in theory) chooses to shoot the family, no matter how important the art is and whether all copies of it are destroyed forever, is probably a brainwashed sociopath.

[Streg]

It's funny because I did the same test elsewhere and 60% of the people decided to kill the family. (More than 200 people answered).
Me? Probably I'd just kill myself.