Many lives are more important than one life. This is clearly consequentialism. Claimants E know the risks of claiming Everest and decide to die, so they take responsibility for their own lives. If they become affected climbers and risk endangering the entire expedition, they must prepare to understand that they cannot descend. This is consequentialism. I focus on saving the entire expedition. FI will hold a climber who has climbed Everest many times responsible for decisions, because he or she may have experienced the conditions and I can trust his or her decision rather than the decision of the majority, including beginners. This could be a Virtue ethic, because I trust a climber who has a lot of climbing experience. I mean, I trust its features. Many people may disagree with me, but I focus on quantity