Survival of the Fittest

was the way I made my decision on who should stay and who should go. I was the nobel peace prize winner for literature and other than having my health and 2 children back at home I didn't think there was a very good reason for me to be saved. My major opponent was the traveling poet I think but I would argue she had no family if it came to debating who should stay. My strategy to get them not to notice who I was worked out well because it was a few minute activity and I brought attention to people who clearly shouldn't be staying (like the draft evader, who brought nothing to the table and had no one to go home to). I think if we had to kick off more than 7 people I might have been the next to go but by pointing out macro sociology of certain people being injured and me being healthy and making it seem micro sociology that I brought nothing to the table could've possibly continued to work for me. I think in the true story it was the right thing for the army guy to take control of the situation as our (britain in this story) country taught/ trained him to do, highest ranking officer takes control of the ship. I also think it was right of the people to jump in after him and save him when he jumped off because he had just help save everyone.I disagree with them then siding against him and not helping him defend a decision that saved their lives. I also disagree with the fact that he got charged with murder, he was just doin g what he was taught, again, by saving as many as he could. i think the top 3 ways to make the best decision possible would be tto choose the healthiest, youngest, and most useful.