← All dilemmas
🌊survival
Preferiresti vivere 60 anni in perfetta salute, assaporando ogni momento senza limiti, oppure 90 anni con una qualità di vita gradualmente ridotta, ma con più tempo per le relazioni e l'amore?
🌍 Join 1 people who already voted
Vote to reveal how SplitVote voters split.
YOUR CHOICE
OR
Anonymous voting. No account required. Results update in real time.
Why this dilemma matters
In high-stakes situations, the calmer option and the safer option often diverge. Choosing “Scegliere 60 anni di salute perfetta, godendo appieno di ogni esperienza senza declino fisico o mentale” prioritises a hard but certain outcome; choosing “Optare per 90 anni con un graduale peggioramento della qualità di vita, privilegiando la longevità e il tempo con i propri cari” gives more weight to a softer but riskier outcome.
Worth asking yourself
- What cost are you more willing to accept?
- Could you live with the outcome you skipped?
More Survival Dilemmas
- A lifeboat holds 8 people maximum. There are 9 survivors. Someone must go overboard or everyone drowns.
- You can go back in time and kill one person as a baby — preventing a genocide that kills 10 million people. The baby is innocent.
- A plane is going down. There are 6 survivors but only 4 parachutes. You have one. Do you give yours up or keep it?
- In a zombie apocalypse, your group finds a fortified shelter with supplies for 10. There are 15 of you. You hold the only key.