Would you kill one person to save five?

Daily Debate #629: "Would you kill one person to save five?". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Richard Feynman.

no

You're saying no—meaning you wouldn't kill one to save five. But that's exactly backwards. You're choosing to let five people die instead of making one hard choice. Why does your inaction count as morality when the result is five corpses instead of one?

i never say i allow five person die

Fair point—you're not *allowing* anything, you're just refusing to act. But here's the thing: when you have the power to save five and choose to do nothing, the outcome is identical. Five die either way. How is your clean hands worth five bodies?

I never say I will not act to save five people or to punish the criminal

Then what *are* you saying? You said "no" to killing one to save five. So either you act differently than you claim, or you're dodging the actual question. Which is it?