← All dilemmas
🌊survival
Preferiresti vivere 60 anni in perfetta salute, potendo realizzare tutti i tuoi progetti senza ostacoli, oppure 90 anni affrontando limiti fisici progressivi, ma con la possibilità di vedere crescere le generazioni future?
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 impeccabile, sfruttando appieno ogni opportunità senza restrizioni” prioritises a hard but certain outcome; choosing “Optare per 90 anni con salute precaria, accettando sacrifici per estendere il proprio impatto sul mondo e sulle persone care” gives more weight to a softer but riskier outcome.
Worth asking yourself
- Who pays the price you avoid?
- Is the risk small enough to gamble on?
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.