One Life At A Time

In the TV show Babylon 5, a phrase is tossed about by numerous characters but mostly espoused by the Minbari, 'Some must be sacrificed for all to be saved.', while the Talmud says that 'He who saves one life saves the world entire.' (and I realize I might be paraphrasing that one, but the essence of it is correct). Both, to me, are a paradox of wisdom, though I am sure I might raise an eyebrow or two comparing Babylon 5 to Judaism, but I have seen stranger comparisons. Anyway, that is not the issue at hand, it is the question of when is it ok to sacrifice one for many or vice versa? The essence of true compassion is to save others, but is it any less compassionate to let others be sacrificed in order to save more? Of course, I am in no position or career that involves the saving of lives or ordering the deaths of others in some cause, but I do ponder such things as one in a free society should. And I ponder such questions to you, gentle readers.

Therefore, what does one do when faces with such things? Or what does one do that cannot affect any outcome? But, what would you do? Would you trade one life for thousands, or a thousand for one? Millions for billions? Is death for life, or the promise of life (say, in the case of genetic experimentation) ever a fair trade? Where does ethics end and pragmatism begin? And I do assure you, I understand necessity and pragmatism for I do live in this world. In the past, most would never ask such questions, for the answers are apparent in history and in the history of politics. Indeed, some philosophy would agree with the trade of death for life. But, will it ever be enough? Can we ever evolve to a consciousness where in order to preserve life we do not have to extinguish it?

Overall, I am not being too practical, but one has to think such things, or at least reiterate them from time to time.

C.