It's an extremely interesting scenario, but for me there is only one option.
I would, of course, opt for the 'eternal nothing'. This is for several reasons:

1. I don't want to live forever. Going to the 'indescribably wonderful paradise' would mean having to go for all eternity, which is a subject which makes me uncomfortable
   
2. Eternal nothing wouldn't be too bad, as there would be no such thing as 'time'. Therefore, I wouldn't class it as any kind of 'torment'. In many ways, it's the easy way out, but hopefully the next point will justify my choice.
   
3. I always put others before myself. As far as I'm concerned, it's the best thing to do. For example, making someone else happy, who in return makes you happy, is better than just being selfish and making yourself happy. In the 'kind' scenario, you are, in the end, helping not only yourself, but a love one, also.
   

Someone on here, I'm sorry I dont' remember who, said "impossible scenarios net impossible answers" (or some such). I think that to be the case here.

But for my part, I'd choose option 2. for Joshy's reasons #2 and #3.

Thanks

The assumption that there is some kind of paradise awaiting people after death is open to question. If one rejects this alternative, the problem in the scenario goes away.

Henrik said:



I would opt to experience nothing rather than see someone I care about in pain for my own selfish gain.

To answer this I feel compelled to use a quote from Asimov.

"I don't believe in an afterlife, so I don't have to spend my whole life fearing hell, or fearing heaven even more. For whatever the tortures of hell, I think the boredom of heaven would be even worse" - Isaac Asimov.

This kinda refutes the concept of heaven as a subjective conceptualization, but you get the point. After a long life... it's great to kick back in the eternal nothingness, I'm sure.... seriously!

First off, there is a good chance we are destined to end up in eternal(or rather timeless) nothing anyway.

You said 'when you die'
Does that mean just before of just after you die?

I think that distinction is not unimportant because common human weakness may, at that last moment, well change the course we are now all merrily plotting for ourselves from the warm and fuzzy comfort of a friendly philosophy forum.

But when that fateful day comes, what will you, or rather your tormented brain under extreme distress, really decide? The mind is willing, but the flesh is weak.

ALWAYS? Which others? Do you opt to eat nothing but the bare minimum to live (or even nothing at all) and then give all the rest of the food you have to homeless people? Do you spend money on an internet connection? How about cable TV? For that matter, do you even have a TV or your own computer? How many pairs of socks do you have? More than you really need? There are people who need that money that you are (I'm sure) spending on such things more than you need those items. Anyone that says they always put others before themselves are almost certainly not being truthful. Part of being a living creature is being somewhat selfish, and sometimes putting yourself ahead of others.

/end rant

As for the scenario in the OP:

I'd chose the nothing. Nothing isn't bad. If it was, then it'd be something. No sense in sending my mom to hell.

I dont believe there is anything that can last forever other than existence itself, not even death... but I would chose nothing

The question is flawed. How can you experience paradise knowing you sent someone you loved to hell? Unless your knowledge of your actions is erased. In any case paradise has to be whatever you make of it so it gives you the means to save the person you love.

The answer lies within whether this "indescribably wonderful paradise" is "wonderful". Many of us perceive "wonderful" to include moments shared with love ones, otherwise there are little "wonder" at all about this paradise, let alone the missing "full of wonder" proposed.
My perception of the proposed "wonderful paradise" will include the granting of all wishes. I will accept the offer to send my beloved straight to pain/ hell but immediately bring them back to my paradise. I am neither kind nor selfish, rather am applying a distorted answer to this open question.

Gee, Wally.

Which would you prefer? A hot dog on a hamburger bun, or a hamburger crammed into a hot dog bun?

Either will give you indigestion.

Not much of a dilemma here...I'd never willingly send the person I love the most to a hell or eternal suffering...

:shocked: the whole thing just turns in on itself ....after all what if the wonderful paradise thingy IS eternal nothingness, then the hell was the conciousness of the choice being made at that time .... this means you would get stuck in the hell because you could never bring yourself to hurt a loved one & make the choice in the first place ..... so to sum up avoidance is the way to go in my book....dont make the choice....make like a zombie ....... however sticking to the criteria ......eternal nothingness with a peaceful mind sounds nice

You cant get eternal nothingness thought, since the universe is infinite in ever way your mind is bound to get stuck at some form of somethingness right after you enter nothingness... and you wont even have time to relax cause you wont be conscient to notice your idle time passing