You can prevent one event from happening. Which do you choose.

[Sephiroth]

If not, then you would end up saving the most amount of lives. Logically it comes down to that. If you have a connection, then you would probably save the person/persons you have the connection to.

Everytime someones says "logically" because they transform lives into some mathematical value or social usefulness ...

What if those 100 are serial killers? What if the father of that one person you chose to kill wants to prove you have chosen the "wrong way" by avenging the death of his son and killing 1 million people instead? You cannot solve this with math or utilitarism. It hurts me when people think lives have a mathematical value that can outweigh the opposing value by sheer number or usefulness. Never think numbers and/or usefulness (e.g. "those are more" or "society gets the most from these) are the only true, just, logical and right choices "only because you have no emotional connection" or even if you have. Now when it comes to the serial killers, obviously I would not chose them. However, no matter what people they are, the lives themselves - I seperate life and person - cannot be summed up to truely outweigh one. If we start thinking like that we lose the part of humanity within that we should never lose. People should pick the option they want but never insist that when it comes to that context a is any more right than context b, et cetera.

I do very well get the point that Kanno does not want the discussion to be like this. But I have the feeling that I have to point that out.