I don't understand the question, Esteban. Using "destiny" in a loose sense, that is, without any metaphysical connotations, I suppose we're all "destined" to live and to die.

Thanks for your answer. You are right. The question is understandable. 

The situation in Frankfurt's book is the following: A social planner should decide the distribution of a vital resource between 10 persons. Each needs five units of the resource to stay alive, and there are exactly forty units. Then eight people may survive, and two individuals are left to die.

The main point of the author is that an egalitarian distribution of the resource will be "morally grotesque."

Assume now that there is one additional unit of the resource. A person that has no units may live a bit longer with one unit. Also, an extra unit may make better off a person who already has five units.

What should the social planner do with the extra unit?

My question is also whether economic science should answer the question above or remain agnostic.

I see, Esteban. It's a thought experiment. There can't really be a correct answer, I suppose, at least not without defining a huge number of variables, since human societies are dynamic systems interwoven with environmental systems in one huge and extremely complex supersystem. At any rate, I think your question is a good way to get people to think about what's going on.

Thanks. You are right. It 's hard to answer the question, but I also find it motivating.

I recommend that you review the Medical Ethics component, Justice. This ethical principle one of the four pillars of Medical ethics, All of us who serve in a hospital setting (I am a chaplain) abides by this ethic. One definition (to begin your study) is "The principle of justice could be described as the moral obligation to act on the basis of fair adjudication between competing claims. As such, it is linked to fairness, entitlement and equality. In health care ethics, this can be subdivided into three categories: fair distribution of scarce resources (distributive justice), respect for people’s rights (rights based justice) and respect for morally acceptable laws (legal justice)  [http://www.alzheimer-europe.org/Ethics/Definitions-and-approaches/The-four-common-bioethical-principles/Justice]

When resources are limited, the ethic of Justice guides to giving the limited resources to those that will be best helped,  rather than those who feel their are entitled to them. Medical ethics pages on the internet dealing with this subject are readily available. I recommend that if your study has this as a key point that you talk to a medical ethics expert before going any further.

A visit to the library of a university with a medical school is also advisable. There are many books on the subject of Medical Ethics. Justice is one of the four common pillars of medical ethics. there is likely many articles you can pull from a Google Scholar search.

Life is not bed of rosy . We live in competitive age & it is very likely that rule of survival of fittest may applied .. When we talked about a person under scare phobia .instead of crying over split milk such individual has to observe his own surroundings & if he has a friend or member in the family who works with the spirit of joy & pleasure , he should spend such time with such person.

I agree destiny is playing a part for every individuals small or big in their standing but they will have to undergo a phase of destiny which he must accept with challenge & find out the means for getting the result from the destiny .

For such individual if he observe with the open mind in it surrounding he will find it a time of thinking calm & quite atmosphere he may certainly find out the positively result of destiny .

This is my personal opinion

Charles Lumpkin, You are right. Medical Ethics should be considered. Thanks for your comment and for the reference.