← All dilemmas
⚖️justice
A pandemic has left one vaccine dose in the region. A policy must be set immediately: do you establish a protocol that prioritizes the young and healthy — maximizing years of life saved — or the elderly and vulnerable, who face near-certain death without it?
Vote to reveal how SplitVote voters split.
YOUR CHOICE
OR
Anonymous voting. No account required. Results update in real time.
Why this dilemma matters
No legal answer is the same as a moral answer here — both have to be argued. Choosing “Prioritize the young and healthy to maximize the number of life-years preserved for society” prioritises the strict rule; choosing “Prioritize the elderly and vulnerable because those most at risk of dying deserve the greatest protection” gives more weight to a context-aware exception.
Worth asking yourself
- Is mercy a kind of justice here, or its opposite?
- Would you apply the same standard to yourself?
More Justice Dilemmas
- A new tax would halve the income of the top 1% and double the income of the bottom 20%. The total wealth in society stays the same.
- An AI sentencing tool is more consistent than human judges across similar cases, but cannot explain its reasoning. Should it be used?
- You are a juror. Every piece of evidence says guilty — but your gut tells you the defendant is innocent. The jury must be unanimous.
- DNA evidence exonerates an innocent person after 25 years on death row. The real killer is 85, frail, and dying. Do they go to prison?