Two rules may seem to be conflicting but they are very clear when you take into account the invoking conditions for each.
The first rule from Star Trek: The Wrath of Kahn is:
The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few or the one.
Spock invoked this rule when he sacrificed his life to save the Enterprise and all those aboard her. But what was the condition at the time? Everyone aboard Enterprise was doomed to die in an explosion and Enterprise could not escape it.
The bible speaks of this rule when it said: “No greater love has no one, that they gave their life for their friend(s).”
The second rule from Star Trek: The Search for Spock is:
The needs of the one, you, outweighed the needs of the many.
Kirk invoked this rule upon learning that his friend Spock who he thought had died, still hung onto life by two sparks which if not combined would go out forever and Spock would be truly dead. Only Spock’s life was in jeopardy, Everyone else risked their lives without sacrificing them in order to save their friend’s life.
Jesus illustrated this rule when he spoke of the shepherd who left the 99 of the flock in search of the one lamb who was in danger.
You don’t have to go to Star Trek for instances which illustrate those 2 rules but life and death decisions play out everyday in real life.
But what if rule one was invoked under the conditions where rule two was supposed to be applied? Then the person would die, I say person since they did not act as their friend.
What if rule two was invoked under the conditions that rule one was supposed to be applied?
Then no one would have sacrificed themselves and they all would have perished.
There are many with conditions which place their life in jeopardy. There are some who were born that way, some who became that way thru the actions of others and some who have reaped the consequences of their own actions. No matter how they got in the condition that they are in, without intervention they will perish as a result of their condition.
Invoking the second rule is not intended to be to sacrifice one person’s life for another. When the risk is shared with many to save the one, it is more likely that in order to save the one, transgressions must take place in order to accomplish it which may cost in money, reputation, and position. However these can be mere setbacks that can be recovered given enough time.
It is so easy for people to misapply these rules especially the second rule. However some may feel that when the condition is a result of their own actions that they are not worth saving. Some may stick their head in the sand and rationalize that they feel that the condition is not fatal. Some may feel that no matter how deserving that it is not worth any sacrifice no matter how small or how temporary it turns out to be.
It is more uplifting to see rule 2 in practice in everyday life. You see it where ever people are raising money for medical conditions that rob some of their lives. Thru time and diligence both the people who raise the money and the people who use the money to find cures work together to save the lives of those who would otherwise die eventually of their medical condition. .
The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many.