Death as sacrifice

Post Reply New Topic

What is worth dying for? Why are these causes worth dying to achieve? How can something be worth dying for?

Any further considerations that I have neglected?

I chose the "your cause" option because no category really seemed to fit me.

I might choose to die for a matter of faith (God, beliefs, etc.).

I might choose to lay down my life to preserve/defend my way of life, my freedoms.

I might choose to sacrifice myself to save the life of another.

I live by this saying, "There are very, very few things worth pursuing to the bitter end in life."

Likewise, I suppose I'd not be willing to sacrifice myself unless it evoked a passion within me to take action.

Off hand, I have nothing that really does that.

I also put "your cause" as that seemed to cover the broadest range of possible situations.

There are several options there which would be worth dying for, but I don't know how to gauge which would be the "minimum."

Selecting "your cause" is missing the point of that option. The point of "your cause" is that it is the only egoist option on the map, where as the other options are altruist or moral (except not sacrificing yourself for anything). So, a person who becomes a suicide bomber just to screw someone else over is doing this for their own cause. The reason it is broad is only because a person can act individualistically for a broad number of purposes.


Pick the choice that reflects the greatest possible altruism that you would believe you would show. The less people, and the less connection you have to these people, the more altruistic it would seem to generally be. The most altruistic pick is your minimum, as it is what you would be least inclined to do(compared to the others).

Does this make sense? Of course there are multiple options that would be worth dying for, there would be no reason for the poll if this were not so. But minimum is the option that you would least desire to die for, but still be willing to do so for. Got it?

In this case, you likely voted in a manner that didn't express your opinion in the clearest manner.

I voted: The nation/community/organization

I would die in defense of my home, in defense of my neighborhood, in defense of my state, and in defense of the country from a hostile attack.

I don't understand these hypothetical scenarios. Under what circumstances are they instantiated in reality?

Umm..... the idea isn't a literal interpretation of the hypothetical, but rather a philosophical interpretation, as the OP is really much more focused on a philosophical question. So, technically, none of these situations EVER have to be instantiated in reality, but the idea of "if this were true" can be used to establish how people view their own lives and the lives of others. Sort of like a thought experiment, where thoughts are used to extract ideas/intuitions from the people who are thinking through the concept.

Basically, I am providing a thought experiment for the purposes of understanding a group of other people and their perspectives. Either to attempt to understand different worldviews than my own, or even to see similarities and perhaps then create questions that would address why that would be so. In either case, there is some point to the hypothetical question, but only a psycho-philosophical point.

I chose a loved one. I would have to consider this to be both my minimum and maximum, and only certain ones would apply.I cannot think of a single cause or posession, which I have ever had, that I considered worth dying.If one considers that something to be more important than the self.

I like the simplicity of your answer.

How close is reasonably close to your opinion.

If you can box yourself, then do it. "Other" is ideally for opinions that are far off the map, and thus cannot reasonably be described by other options on the poll. For example, if you were massively suicidal and would sacrifice your life for nothing (suicide) then that would be other as it is radically unlike any other option. (hopefully not your case) However, if a currently existing option could generally fit your idea somewhat, so long as you do some interpretive maneuvering, then pick a pre-existing option. For example, if you say "I would die for my non-close friends", try to find the option that is closest to that in terms of how altruistic that is. You can also describe your answer and the reasoning behind it in a post on the thread.

In war how many men have volunteered to hold off the enemy so that their friends will have a chance to escape?

How many soldiers have thrown themselves onto a grenade so that only they will die instead of the whole group?

"Greater love hath no man than he should lay down his life for his friends"

Perhaps the question should be looked at from a different viewpoint. First of all, if someone is willing to die for any reason does that indicate that the person no longer values his/her life? Secondly many of the instances in which a person dies in the act of performing something dangerous may not indicate that death is inevitable but that the chance of death is worth taking no matter how slim survival might be because of the value of a successful act. Many people who have died trying to save others may not think they will not survive. And finally, those people who knowingly die in an act such as a suicide bombing may sincerely believe in a happy afterlife and the death is therefor somehow not as real as one who believes in obliteration. That's why the religious belief in Christ's sacrifice negates the value of the act since Christ's afterlife is secured.

i voted "No cause or person is worth dying for."
i am the only one who voted that way so far.

to choose to die is to choose to cease to be involved.
even if my death was the death that tipped the balance between world peace and world war, i would stay alive because i would never know what happened if i died.

i can not give my life for any reason. i would not consciously choose that my iife will end for any cause.

but i may lose my life trying to rescue my girlfriend or father. if they were in a burning building, i would go in and i would hope that we all survive. under those circumstances my life would be lost, but not deliberately as i would fight hard to survive.

I think it might mean the person considers other lives/things as more valuable than their life. I very much agree. I think there is a big difference between risking life and sacrificing life. They might not think they will live or die. Many people will attest they do not really think, but rather react in emergency situations. Not sure about all this part at the moment...

I would die for a loved one if he/she wanted to live that badly. I wouldn't make anyone die for me though. I'd be like, "see ya".