Who is a worse friend?

Post Reply New Topic

Ok, so there are two pairs of friends. Pair A and Pair B. Friends A and Friends B have known each other for about the same amount of time, have done about the same amount of stuff together, have about the same net worth, and are in most other respects, identical. You might also imagine them as both having been initially the same two people which some mad scientist made a perfect copy of to test different hypothetical scenarios.

One member of Pair A has a million dollars, which he leaves on a table while he leaves his house for a little while. He asks his friend to watch the money while he is gone. He comes back and discovers that his friend has run off with the million dollars, and said friend never returns.

A member of Pair B has five dollars, which he leaves on a table while he leaves his house for a little while. He asks his friend to watch the money while he is gone. He comes back and discovers that his friend has run off with the five dollars, and said friend never returns.

Now the question I will ask all here, who is the worse friend of these two pairs of friends? The one who ran off with 5 dollars, or a million dollars? Also say whether you are AS or NT.

"Who is a worse friend" is subjective, so I put they're both equal because they both did exactly the same thing, only the amount of money changed, which is irrelevant to the question.

+1

To steal money from a friend is to steal money from a friend. The larger amount only makes the wrong even more hurtful, but I don't think it's any more "right" to steal only $5.

I think you can prove something here. I answered the thing I felt more comfortable with knowing that the other answer could have been more "morally proper".

Although both are doing the same bad thing, and the damage from the one that took the 1million is bigger than the other one, I choose the one that took the 5 bucks, I'm AS. That one is what is most likely to happen to me so I feel bad for the guy as I would feel bad if it was me in that position (been there, not nice O_o)

As for the other guy, any way the idiot left 1million is his own fault what happened.

Very nice!

Thanks for sharing this.

The one who stole the 5$, anyone who does that is not worth having as a friend anyway!

I has asperger.

I think the bigger question is why someone would leave $1million laying around on the table.

I don't think that the amount of money is entirely irrelevant. We know, as per the description of the scenario, that, before the thefts took place, both victims were equally wealthy. What we do not know is how wealthy they were. If we imagine that both were multi-billionaires, then I could agree that the amount of money stolen was irrelevant, and the only crime committed in both cases was a betrayal of friendship.

However, if the one million dollars represented the victim's total worth (or a vast amjority of it) and by having it stolen she now has no money at all, then the situation is different. The person who has stolen one million dollars from her friend has left her without any money. Without money, it would be impossible for her friend to eat or pay bills, and so by stealing all her friend's money she has condemned her to starve, something the other thief did not do. In this scenario the two thieves have committed different crimes (I am assuming the victim is aware that the one million dollars was the entirety of her friend's worth).

Of course, without knowing how much money the victims had before the crime was committed, it isn't possible to say whether the crimes were the same.

I said both are equally wrong, with Asperger's. Malicious intent is malicious intent, and justifying it by a number is wrong. The one that took $5 probably would have taken a million if he'd had the chance.

In my eyes:

Pair A stole a non-neglegible amount => worse
The person in Pair B is quite pathetic if they want to destroy a friendship over $5, and probably needs help.

Overall I think the two scenarios are not comparable due to that (pair a = greed or something, no idea what's up with the person in pair b)

I identify myself as AS, but I've never sought an official dx.

I think they are both equally bad friends. The guy who ran off with a million dollars committed a much more serious crime, and therefore deserves a more serious punishment, but the principle of the two situations is the same as far as friendship is concerned. The both stole from a friend and broke their trust.

Last edited by elderwanda on 10 May 2009, 2:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

As FRIENDS, they are both equally bad.

They betrayed the other person's trust, they stole money, and they never returned.

The loss of a million dollars sucked more, but the principle is still the same.

Let me ask you guys another question. Suppose that in both pairs, instead of taking the money and running off, the other person took the money, spent it on something entirely for himself, and then stuck around saying he still wanted to be friends. How would this change your answer?

You dont take anything that is not yours and if so you brake the trust in friendship. Its stupid and selfish no matter the value of the money

"A lie is a lie is a lie" - Wesley Snipes in "MoneyTrain"

If A would come back can count himself as a dead man.

If the other comes back I would make him suffer for the 5.

I would feel betrayed in both scenarios, but I would be more willing to forgive B. Just as long as he paid me back my 5 dollars at some point.

If someone stole a fiver and never came back you wouldn't hate them, you'd forget about them with time

If someone stole $1,000,000 you just made an enemy

therefore A is a worse friend