While the logic of Rabbi Akiva makes sense that one should take care of oneself and at least let one person live, Ben Petura’s argument is also clear here. If you use the loving that the Torah states, then one cannot value your own life above your friends. Ben Petura is using this logic because how can you choose your life above someone else’s if you have to value both yourself and your friend all the same.

In defense of Petura’s point, I think that there’s something very noble in dying alongside another person. The conscious decision to have both men drink from the water symbolizes that no life is more important than another. Ultimately, no human should have to/ is fully capable of making the decision of whose existence is more valuable; simply put, it is better for both men to die than to take on the role of God.

Ben Petura would say to Rabbi Akiva that it is not prudent or appropriate to put your life above someone else’s, and he would probably also say that by not even trying to save the other person’s life, you are consciously making the choice to let them die, which is essentially murder. I think he would say that intention plays a huge role and making the effort to try to save both people counts for more than actually saving one of the lives at the expense of the other.

Ben Petura’s reasoning could be that it is not right for one to play god and decide who should live and who should die. By keeping the water to yourself you are sentencing the other man to death. Ben Peutrah could feel that it is better to instead leave that decision to god and let both men die together. This could be based off of what Rabbi Akiva said, to love your fellow as yourself is ‘the great principle of the torah’

I think that the Ben Petura would respond to Rabbi Akiva that you cannot sit idly by and watch as your fellow dies. You must share your drink with him even though doing so may lead to both of your deaths. If you were to just drink the drink without sharing as Rabbi Akiva suggests, you would be contributing to your fellow’s death, though you are not physically killing him yourself. B

I think that the Ben Petura would respond to Rabbi Akiva that you cannot sit idly by and watch as your fellow dies. You must share your drink with him even though doing so may lead to both of your deaths. If you were to just drink the drink without sharing as Rabbi Akiva suggests, you would be contributing to your fellow’s death, though you are not physically killing him yourself. B

Obviously engaging with any violent person poses danger; however, once someone helps, others are inclined to do so. The reason no one came to save the woman is because of the bystander effect. No one made the first move, so no one ended up helping her. If someone makes the first move, then others may be more likely to jump in.