Would you kill one person to save five?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Would you kill one person to save five?". Your opponent's style: Richard Feynman

yes

You just said "yes"—but to what? That you'd kill one to save five? Fine. Then you've already conceded the real problem: you're willing to *choose* who dies. The math is seductive, but it's a trap. Once you accept that *you* get to decide whose life has less value, you've abandoned any moral principle and embraced pure utilitarianism. Why stop at five? Ten? A hundred? A million? If numbers are all that matter, you've given yourself permission to sacrifice anyone, anytime the arithmetic works. The question isn't whether five lives beat one. It's whether *you* have the right to play God with the answer.