Miles under the ground in Helsinki, Finland, lies a decades-old city that’s bustling and lively…
What if the one that got up twisted his ankle and then getting up hurt it more and caused a permanent limp but the one who didn’t get up spared further injury by staying down until help arrived? Or did the one who stayed down just live out the rest of his life on the ground and starve to death while the other one got up and went to lunch? Cause in that case he’d be weakened from starving vs nourished from lunch and therefor the one who got up and ate is stronger. If the guy just refused to get up for so long he died then obviously someone alive is stronger than a corpse but I feel like it’s a weird thing to brag about “I’m stronger than a corpse”.
Also if the one who stood back up didn’t help the other one up he may be strong but kind of a dick move, specially if helping the guy was the difference between him dying of starvation. This has been another installment of “Destroying a metaphor by taking it completely literally with Slick1” 
No-- Designing the original ‘Dark side of the Moon’ cover!