harder than the gazillions moral choice we already made. Im not so sure on that. The two closest things I can find, that address something "remotely close" are

harder than the gazillions moral choice we already made. Im not so sure on that. The two closest things I can find, that address something "remotely close" are the following, and they more or less drag the law into it (sadly) but it is a sort of moral arbiter: This is an actual case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Dudley_and_Stephens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Dudley_and_Stephens And the more philosophical version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_of_the_Speluncean_Explorers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_of_the_Speluncean_Exp... There is a quote in the Dudley and Stephens one that is rather interesting: "We are often compelled to set up standards we cannot reach ourselves, and to lay down rules which we could not ourselves satisfy. But a man has no right to declare temptation to be an excuse, though he might himself have yielded to it, nor allow compassion for the criminal to change or weaken in any manner the legal definition of the crime."