Hypothetical: Ridding the world of evil people.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

In light of your amazing contributions to a football bulletin board, you have been deemed a person with a very high understanding of humanity. (This is hypothetical if that's not already obvious.)

As a result, some higher power has approached you for help. You may assume that this higher power is someone you respect and will not turn down, whether it's God, the Illuminati, Batman, The Global Commission To Make The World A Better Place, aliens, the Teamsters, dolphins, or some other group. It doesn't matter to me.

You are given the following assignment:

1. Develop up to 10 yes/no questions that everyone in the world must answer truthfully.
2. Define a "cutoff score" where people scoring below (or above) a certain level will be categorized as non-contributing members of the world. They will suddenly cease to exist.

The rules:

A. For your ethical purposes, you may assume that some time travel or divine intervention ensures they were never born, or if you prefer ... public executions. But let's go with the most humane route that doesn't make you a mass murderer.

B. Questions may be worded any way you wish. They can be negative ("Have you ever stolen something from someone else's house?"), they can be positive ("Have you ever helped a stranger in a broken-down car?), they can be value-laden ("Do you believe in the Hindu god Vishnu?), they can be attitudinal ("Do you approve of pedophilia"?), they can be attributes ("Are you under 5 feet tall?"), they can be oddly specific ("Are you a Denver Bronco?"), they can be whatever you want as long as they're yes/no questions.

C. You can have anywhere from 1 to 10 questions. Your call.

D. People get 1 point for every yes, and 0 points for every no. You can define a minimum passing score or a maximum passing score depending on how you word your questions. For example, you can define 10 questions about positive traits and anyone getting less than 9 points is gone, or you can define 4 questions about negative traits and anyone getting more than 2 points is gone. You get to design it.

E. Recognize that once you set the scoring, the people who fail your test will cease to exist. No exceptions to the rule. If your mom fails, she's gone right along with those Taliban leaders. And if you arrange questions to save your sister the crack whore, maybe her pimp will get saved, too. This is a standardized test.

F. Recognize that you have to take the test, too.

With those rules, what are your questions, what scores will let people survive, and what percent of the population do you think will cease to exist?

For Listo and Pestilence.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

For Listo and Pestilence.

That still leaves too much leeway. For instance:

"Should you refrain from causing unnecessary harm, both physical and psychological, to other living beings?"

Normal good guy answer: Yes, that's bad and you shouldn't do it.

Normal bad guy answer: No, I hurt people even if it's unnecessary because it's expedient.

Psychotic answer: Yes, I should refrain from doing things, but I don't because I'm not concerned with what I should or shouldn't do.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by listopencil

That still leaves too much leeway. For instance:

"Should you refrain from causing unnecessary harm, both physical and psychological, to other living beings?"

Normal good guy answer: Yes, that's bad and you shouldn't do it.

Normal bad guy answer: No, I hurt people even if it's unnecessary because it's expedient.

Psychotic answer: Yes, I should refrain from doing things, but I don't because I'm not concerned with what I should or shouldn't do.

That's why none of the questions I posted were
"Should you".

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by listopencil

That still leaves too much leeway. For instance:

"Should you refrain from causing unnecessary harm, both physical and psychological, to other living beings?"

Normal good guy answer: Yes, that's bad and you shouldn't do it.

Normal bad guy answer: No, I hurt people even if it's unnecessary because it's expedient.

Psychotic answer: Yes, I should refrain from doing things, but I don't because I'm not concerned with what I should or shouldn't do.

Yeah, it seems like our questions need to concentrate on whether they behave in the manner we want rather than do they know right from wrong.

Since they have to answer truthfully, we could also ask attitude questions or future behavior questions, e.g., "would you rape a child if the opportunity arose". We'd just have to word any attitude questions very carefully, because if people answer truthfully you might catch a bunch of people who occasionally have evil thoughts but would never act on them.

Of course, maybe a person's definition is that having a single evil thought in an area qualifies a person for removal, and that's allowable under the rules.