← All dilemmas
🚨survival
Should governments force residents to leave high-risk cities after repeated missile attacks?
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 “Yes. Saving lives can justify mandatory evacuation” prioritises a hard but certain outcome; choosing “No. People should not be forced from their homes” gives more weight to a softer but riskier outcome.
Worth asking yourself
- Is the risk small enough to gamble on?
- What cost are you more willing to accept?
More Survival Dilemmas
- A lifeboat holds 8. There are 9 of you. Nobody volunteers. Someone proposes the eldest goes — they look at you and nod.
- 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?
- Your group of 13 reaches a fortified shelter — already occupied by 8 strangers at capacity. They refuse to open. Your group includes children. You could force the door; they have no weapons.