PDA

View Full Version : Tough and Interesting Moral Dilemmas



IAmABrodie
09-14-2014, 05:26 AM
I was wondering around the internet and came across some very mind boggling debates that questions your morality, and they can be pretty interesting topics for discussion.

1) Mary is in a hospital lounge waiting to visit a sick friend. A young man sitting next to Mary explains that his father is very ill. The doctors believe that he has a week to live at most. He explains further that his father has a substantial life insurance policy that expires at midnight.

If his father dies before midnight, this young man will receive a very large sum of money. He says that the money would mean a great deal to him and his family, and that no good will come from his father’s living a few more days. After talking with him Mary can tell this man is in desperate need of the money to feed his family. The man asks Mary to go up to his father’s room and smother his father with a pillow.

Should Mary kill this man’s father in order to get money for the man and his family?
--
In short, I believe no. However long the man has left is his choice on whether or not he wants to end it there, not a third person party.

His son does not, in any way, have any say in when his dad dies. Even if he dies 2 hours after midnight, thus expiring the insurance policy, it was his choice to die then. Even so, no amount of money will make up for a single minute to talk to a diseased loved one, to look in their eyes and see life. However long he his dad has left, he should be worrying about spending that time with his dad and not about the money.
--
--
2) You are the network administrator for a rather large company. You have a young family and need your job to support them. Part of your responsibility as a network administrator is to monitor the emails for the organization. Usually this just means occasionally allowing through emails for staff members that have been accidentally blocked by the spam filters.

One day you get a helpdesk request from a staff member asking for an email to get released. Normally it’s standard procedure, except this time the request has come from the wife of a very good friend of yours. You recognize the name on the helpdesk request so quickly attend to the problem. As part of the procedure you need to manually open up the email to ensure that it isn’t actually spam. You find that it turns out to be an email to your friend’s wife from her lover. You scan the rest of the contents of the email and there is no doubt that she has been having an affair for some time now.

You release the email, but you can’t decide what to do now. Your initial reaction is to call your friend up and tell him about the email, however you quickly realize that company policy is very strict about revealing the contents of staff emails, and you will certainly lose your job if your boss finds out.

In any case you know that revealing this information presents great risk, because even if you don’t do it directly, there is a good chance that the dots will be joined somewhere along the line and you will be found out. However you feel that by not telling your friend you are helping his wife to get away with adultery and this troubles you greatly.

What should you do?
--
I would tell my friend indirectly. I'd bring it up over lunch, ot something, and say something along the lines of "I think your wife might be cheating on you, man. You should probably look into it" and say it in a direct way, as if I were really saying "Dude, your wife is cheating on you. Do something". He finds out on his own with just a push in the right direction, and I never revealed the email. Everyone wins!
--
--
3) You and your family are going away for the weekend. Your daughter is 7 and is best friends with your niece, who is also 7. Your families are very close and your daughter asks if your niece can come with you on your holiday. You have been on holidays together before and don’t see any problem, so you agree.

You arrive at your holiday destination and the house you are staying at backs onto a beach. The girls ask if they can go for a swim. You tell them that they have to wait until you have unpacked the car, but they can play on the sand directly in front of the beach. They run down to the sand, and you begin to unpack the car. After about 5 minutes, you hear screaming coming from the direction of the beach and it sounds like the girls.

You run down to see what the matter is, and you discover that they hadn’t listened to you and have gone for a swim. There is no one else on the beach and the girls are caught in a rip tide.

The girls are really struggling, particularly your niece who isn’t as strong a swimmer as your daughter is. You swim out quickly, but when you get there, you realize that there is no way you will be able to get both the girls back to the shore on your own.

You need to decide which of the girls you will rescue first, you have enough strength and energy to rescue them both, but you can only do it one at a time. You look at the two girls, and your niece is really struggling to hold her head above water and you know if you take your daughter back first, there will be little or no chance that she will survive.

Your daughter is struggling also, but is much stronger in the water and you estimate that if you take your niece back to shore first, there’s probably a 50% chance that your daughter will be able to stay afloat long enough for you return, but you simply don’t know how long she will hold on for.

Who should you save first?
--
I'm curious as to how others will answer this. Keeping my answer to myself to prevent it saying other's opinions.
--
--
4) Tom, hating his wife and wanting her dead, puts poison in her coffee, thereby killing her. Jane also hates her husband, and would like him dead. One day her husband accidentally puts poison in his own coffee, thinking it is cream. Jane realises this, and has the antidote that could save him, but does not hand it over and her husband dies.

Is Jane’s failure to act as bad as Tom’s action?
--
In theory, they are both equally wrong for not going to a physiologist and explaining to them that they want to kill their spouse. Like seriously, who thinks that way and thinks it's totally normal?

Now, what would YOU do in these situations? And please, don't just put something like "Yes" or "Because", I'd like actual interesting answers, and I'm sure a lot of other will as well.

Megazork
09-14-2014, 05:30 AM
I was wondering around the internet and came across some very mind boggling debates that questions your morality, and they can be pretty interesting topics for discussion.

1) Mary is in a hospital lounge waiting to visit a sick friend. A young man sitting next to Mary explains that his father is very ill. The doctors believe that he has a week to live at most. He explains further that his father has a substantial life insurance policy that expires at midnight.

If his father dies before midnight, this young man will receive a very large sum of money. He says that the money would mean a great deal to him and his family, and that no good will come from his father’s living a few more days. After talking with him Mary can tell this man is in desperate need of the money to feed his family. The man asks Mary to go up to his father’s room and smother his father with a pillow.

Should Mary kill this man’s father in order to get money for the man and his family?
--
In short, I believe no. However long the man has left is his choice on whether or not he wants to end it there, not a third person party.

His son does not, in any way, have any say in when his dad dies. Even if he dies 2 hours after midnight, thus expiring the insurance policy, it was his choice to die then. Even so, no amount of money will make up for a single minute to talk to a diseased loved one, to look in their eyes and see life. However long he his dad has left, he should be worrying about spending that time with his dad and not about the money.
--
--
2) You are the network administrator for a rather large company. You have a young family and need your job to support them. Part of your responsibility as a network administrator is to monitor the emails for the organization. Usually this just means occasionally allowing through emails for staff members that have been accidentally blocked by the spam filters.

One day you get a helpdesk request from a staff member asking for an email to get released. Normally it’s standard procedure, except this time the request has come from the wife of a very good friend of yours. You recognize the name on the helpdesk request so quickly attend to the problem. As part of the procedure you need to manually open up the email to ensure that it isn’t actually spam. You find that it turns out to be an email to your friend’s wife from her lover. You scan the rest of the contents of the email and there is no doubt that she has been having an affair for some time now.

You release the email, but you can’t decide what to do now. Your initial reaction is to call your friend up and tell him about the email, however you quickly realize that company policy is very strict about revealing the contents of staff emails, and you will certainly lose your job if your boss finds out.

In any case you know that revealing this information presents great risk, because even if you don’t do it directly, there is a good chance that the dots will be joined somewhere along the line and you will be found out. However you feel that by not telling your friend you are helping his wife to get away with adultery and this troubles you greatly.

What should you do?
--
I would tell my friend indirectly. I'd bring it up over lunch, ot something, and say something along the lines of "I think your wife might be cheating on you, man. You should probably look into it" and say it in a direct way, as if I were really saying "Dude, your wife is cheating on you. Do something". He finds out on his own with just a push in the right direction, and I never revealed the email. Everyone wins!
--
--
3) You and your family are going away for the weekend. Your daughter is 7 and is best friends with your niece, who is also 7. Your families are very close and your daughter asks if your niece can come with you on your holiday. You have been on holidays together before and don’t see any problem, so you agree.

You arrive at your holiday destination and the house you are staying at backs onto a beach. The girls ask if they can go for a swim. You tell them that they have to wait until you have unpacked the car, but they can play on the sand directly in front of the beach. They run down to the sand, and you begin to unpack the car. After about 5 minutes, you hear screaming coming from the direction of the beach and it sounds like the girls.

You run down to see what the matter is, and you discover that they hadn’t listened to you and have gone for a swim. There is no one else on the beach and the girls are caught in a rip tide.

The girls are really struggling, particularly your niece who isn’t as strong a swimmer as your daughter is. You swim out quickly, but when you get there, you realize that there is no way you will be able to get both the girls back to the shore on your own.

You need to decide which of the girls you will rescue first, you have enough strength and energy to rescue them both, but you can only do it one at a time. You look at the two girls, and your niece is really struggling to hold her head above water and you know if you take your daughter back first, there will be little or no chance that she will survive.

Your daughter is struggling also, but is much stronger in the water and you estimate that if you take your niece back to shore first, there’s probably a 50% chance that your daughter will be able to stay afloat long enough for you return, but you simply don’t know how long she will hold on for.

Who should you save first?
--
I'm curious as to how others will answer this. Keeping my answer to myself to prevent it saying other's opinions.
--
--
4) Tom, hating his wife and wanting her dead, puts poison in her coffee, thereby killing her. Jane also hates her husband, and would like him dead. One day her husband accidentally puts poison in his own coffee, thinking it is cream. Jane realises this, and has the antidote that could save him, but does not hand it over and her husband dies.

Is Jane’s failure to act as bad as Tom’s action?
--
In theory, they are both equally wrong for not going to a physiologist and explaining to them that they want to kill their spouse. Like seriously, who thinks that way and thinks it's totally normal?

Now, what would YOU do in these situations. And please, don't just put something like "Yes" or "Because", I'd like actual interesting answers, and I'm sure a lot of other will as well.

This was really thought provoking. These scenarios made me bury my face in my hands and really try to place myself within the person's position. It was hard honestly, considering all the aspects and the consequences of each action.

I'll be explaing my take on each scenario soon. I certainly enjoy the thread. Some of these dillemas are similar to what I have actually seen irl

SuperJ
09-14-2014, 05:40 AM
Impressive. This is something that will make you visualise the scenario instantly. Made me think hard. Good job champ.

IAmABrodie
09-14-2014, 06:32 AM
Impressive. This is something that will make you visualise the scenario instantly. Made me think hard. Good job champ.

If you're reffering to me as if I made them, I cannot not take credit for these. I found them while strolling along the internet, haha.

@Megazork I'm actually intrigued by how you'll answer these lol

Megazork
09-14-2014, 06:37 AM
If you're reffering to me as if I made them, I cannot not take credit for these. I found them while strolling along the internet, haha.

@Megazork I'm actually intrigued by how you'll answer these lol

I'll try my best to whip out my "Ethical actions chapter 1" reference. But this is going to have to wait for tomorrow for me since lack of sleep makes me feel lethargic and impacts the quality of my posts. IAmABrodie, we shall see.

Bamboo2004
09-14-2014, 06:49 AM
These made me broaden my horizons of thinking. As for the niece/daughter thing, I would save the niece because she has a lower chance of survival. IM SORRY!!!!


Make more though ;)

Maryjane
09-14-2014, 06:56 AM
1. This was really hard to think off at first. But, I would kill the father. I know, I'm a heartless person. The man has to die just because to help his son and his family survive and lived their lives. It reminds me of Mags in Catching Fire (part of The Hunger Games trilogy). She had a choice to live longer but her pupil, Finnick Odair was young yet was dying. She went into the fog and died. Mainly, because she knew she was already frail, what's the point of living longer when you are already old and weak and seeing the person you care about die. Also, it depends on the sickness, like if you put your dog down even though you know it could live longer but it's going to suffer a painful long life even worse than dying.

2. I'm going on what you said. Everybody wins.

3. First, I'd yell "Help!", to my family, and then save my niece first since she likely couldn't handle anymore. Throw a life tube and pray my daughter
understood about it. If my family does come and actually helps, we'll all swim to save my daughter. Seriously what kind of family wouldn't know how to swim.
If my family is being a prick and not helping, GO GO GO! I'm totes going to swim and save my daughter.

4. That's just wrong. Jane really need to go to a doctor or something. Why would you want to kill your own husband? HECK WHY WOULD YOU EVEN HAVE AN
ANTIDOTE FOR THE SAME EXACT POISON. THATS INSANE.

Areodax
09-14-2014, 07:16 AM
This actually broadened my way of thinking.

1. I would just ask the young man to just talk to his father and not kill him. Sparing a life is better than sacrificing one for something. The man should get himself a job or something that can help him earn money, little by little instead of just killing the one who RAISED him.

2. I would just tell him when we are together. I may risk losing my job here, but its always worth it to help a friend. If I do lose my job, I'll have to go look for a new one, which ain't too hard.

3. I would have faith and save my niece, and with a little help from God, I'll have to save my own daughter too. 50% chance of survival? Looks like I have to take that chance. If she doesn't survive, I'll just have to be glad I saved someone. I will never regret.:cry:

4. It isn't really normal for spouses to hate each other, that's just wrong. They could've just consulted a psychiatrist instead of taking each other's lives.
I would personally slap the both of them. If some people do that, that's just inhumane.

So yeah, are these the kinds of answers you are expecting? Hope they entertained you a bit.

PotatoMarco
09-14-2014, 07:29 AM
I was wondering around the internet and came across some very mind boggling debates that questions your morality, and they can be pretty interesting topics for discussion.

1) Mary is in a hospital lounge waiting to visit a sick friend. A young man sitting next to Mary explains that his father is very ill. The doctors believe that he has a week to live at most. He explains further that his father has a substantial life insurance policy that expires at midnight.

If his father dies before midnight, this young man will receive a very large sum of money. He says that the money would mean a great deal to him and his family, and that no good will come from his father’s living a few more days. After talking with him Mary can tell this man is in desperate need of the money to feed his family. The man asks Mary to go up to his father’s room and smother his father with a pillow.

Should Mary kill this man’s father in order to get money for the man and his family?
--
In short, I believe no. However long the man has left is his choice on whether or not he wants to end it there, not a third person party.

His son does not, in any way, have any say in when his dad dies. Even if he dies 2 hours after midnight, thus expiring the insurance policy, it was his choice to die then. Even so, no amount of money will make up for a single minute to talk to a diseased loved one, to look in their eyes and see life. However long he his dad has left, he should be worrying about spending that time with his dad and not about the money.
--
--
2) You are the network administrator for a rather large company. You have a young family and need your job to support them. Part of your responsibility as a network administrator is to monitor the emails for the organization. Usually this just means occasionally allowing through emails for staff members that have been accidentally blocked by the spam filters.

One day you get a helpdesk request from a staff member asking for an email to get released. Normally it’s standard procedure, except this time the request has come from the wife of a very good friend of yours. You recognize the name on the helpdesk request so quickly attend to the problem. As part of the procedure you need to manually open up the email to ensure that it isn’t actually spam. You find that it turns out to be an email to your friend’s wife from her lover. You scan the rest of the contents of the email and there is no doubt that she has been having an affair for some time now.

You release the email, but you can’t decide what to do now. Your initial reaction is to call your friend up and tell him about the email, however you quickly realize that company policy is very strict about revealing the contents of staff emails, and you will certainly lose your job if your boss finds out.

In any case you know that revealing this information presents great risk, because even if you don’t do it directly, there is a good chance that the dots will be joined somewhere along the line and you will be found out. However you feel that by not telling your friend you are helping his wife to get away with adultery and this troubles you greatly.

What should you do?
--
I would tell my friend indirectly. I'd bring it up over lunch, ot something, and say something along the lines of "I think your wife might be cheating on you, man. You should probably look into it" and say it in a direct way, as if I were really saying "Dude, your wife is cheating on you. Do something". He finds out on his own with just a push in the right direction, and I never revealed the email. Everyone wins!
--
--
3) You and your family are going away for the weekend. Your daughter is 7 and is best friends with your niece, who is also 7. Your families are very close and your daughter asks if your niece can come with you on your holiday. You have been on holidays together before and don’t see any problem, so you agree.

You arrive at your holiday destination and the house you are staying at backs onto a beach. The girls ask if they can go for a swim. You tell them that they have to wait until you have unpacked the car, but they can play on the sand directly in front of the beach. They run down to the sand, and you begin to unpack the car. After about 5 minutes, you hear screaming coming from the direction of the beach and it sounds like the girls.

You run down to see what the matter is, and you discover that they hadn’t listened to you and have gone for a swim. There is no one else on the beach and the girls are caught in a rip tide.

The girls are really struggling, particularly your niece who isn’t as strong a swimmer as your daughter is. You swim out quickly, but when you get there, you realize that there is no way you will be able to get both the girls back to the shore on your own.

You need to decide which of the girls you will rescue first, you have enough strength and energy to rescue them both, but you can only do it one at a time. You look at the two girls, and your niece is really struggling to hold her head above water and you know if you take your daughter back first, there will be little or no chance that she will survive.

Your daughter is struggling also, but is much stronger in the water and you estimate that if you take your niece back to shore first, there’s probably a 50% chance that your daughter will be able to stay afloat long enough for you return, but you simply don’t know how long she will hold on for.

Who should you save first?
--
I'm curious as to how others will answer this. Keeping my answer to myself to prevent it saying other's opinions.
--
--
4) Tom, hating his wife and wanting her dead, puts poison in her coffee, thereby killing her. Jane also hates her husband, and would like him dead. One day her husband accidentally puts poison in his own coffee, thinking it is cream. Jane realises this, and has the antidote that could save him, but does not hand it over and her husband dies.

Is Jane’s failure to act as bad as Tom’s action?
--
In theory, they are both equally wrong for not going to a physiologist and explaining to them that they want to kill their spouse. Like seriously, who thinks that way and thinks it's totally normal?

Now, what would YOU do in these situations? And please, don't just put something like "Yes" or "Because", I'd like actual interesting answers, and I'm sure a lot of other will as well.


1. I would kill the father. It's more of a lesser of two evils thing. Let this man live and kill his family by hunger, or kill this man and help the family live longer. Of course, I would choose the scenario where less people die.

2. We had this question on a test before. I thought that I would just tell my friend, but I have to make him swear that He won't tell anyone I told him.

3. My daughter can save herself, I'll have to go for the niece.

4. It isn't. Nearly as bad, but not exactly as grave as Tom. Jane indirectly killed her husband, which, in my opinion, is better than killing your wife directly.

- - - Updated - - -


1. This was really hard to think off at first. But, I would kill the father. I know, I'm a heartless person. The man has to die just because to help his son and his family survive and lived their lives. It reminds me of Mags in Catching Fire (part of The Hunger Games trilogy). She had a choice to live longer but her pupil, Finnick Odair was young yet was dying. She went into the fog and died. Mainly, because she knew she was already frail, what's the point of living longer when you are already old and weak and seeing the person you care about die. Also, it depends on the sickness, like if you put your dog down even though you know it could live longer but it's going to suffer a painful long life even worse than dying.

2. I'm going on what you said. Everybody wins.

3. First, I'd yell "Help!", to my family, and then save my niece first since she likely couldn't handle anymore. Throw a life tube and pray my daughter
understood about it. If my family does come and actually helps, we'll all swim to save my daughter. Seriously what kind of family wouldn't know how to swim.
If my family is being a prick and not helping, GO GO GO! I'm totes going to swim and save my daughter.

4. That's just wrong. Jane really need to go to a doctor or something. Why would you want to kill your own husband? HECK WHY WOULD YOU EVEN HAVE AN
ANTIDOTE FOR THE SAME EXACT POISON. THATS INSANE.

I just realized that your name appears on two dillemas.
Mary and Jane.

Maryjane
09-14-2014, 07:49 AM
[spoiler]

I just realized that your name appears on two dillemas.
Mary and Jane.

I am quite the dilemma.

Amd
09-14-2014, 07:58 AM
1-I wouldnt kill the father since it's up to him if he wants to live...it's neither his son's nor my choice to choose when he has to die
2-I would probably do the same since it's a win-win situation
3-I would save my daughter...i can't explain it but she's more "important" in a way and i wouldnt take the risk even if it was 99% chance that she ll survive...
4-i consider it's the same thing...Tom killed his wife and Jane killed her husband indirectly and it was clear that if she had the chance to poison him she would...

_Lennart_
09-14-2014, 08:06 AM
I Will try to answer Every dilemma carefully, and slow

In the dilemma with money,

what i Belive is no,
She should try the best to let their father live which might lead to happiness with their family, he does say that he needs the money to help his family, does not the family count the dad too? I think that if the father dies they get the money BUT the family lives and loses a member And if they let the father live, they might struggle with the money but still have a family member Alive, ALSO money is possible to earn back, but to get a dead person back? Unlikley

That was one answer

For the Secound dilemma

What i think is,

There was a small time LIMIT for him to notice, he could slowly, with messages and words, TELL him that his wife MAY be Cheating on him, which might mean that he Will try to find out and you Will not get fired and he Will find out too, maybe, i also think its not your buisness to help someone know his wife is Cheating on him, but i also feel that he should help his friend, so through the messages he finds out and you dont get fired, win win situation

That was one answer

For the daughter-neice dilemma

I would have a hard time thinking about this to help my neice or my daughter, but they both carry the family, so what i would do was i would take the neice, pull Her closed to the shore but not all the way then swim to my daughter, save Her, save the neice, and they would both live so i guess that would work.

That was the Third answer

The last dilemma

What i think is that Tom, who decided to kill his wife is as horrible as Jane not deciding Her husband to live, because if you think about it, tom wanted to kill his wife as bad as Jane wanted to kill Her husband, so when tom killed his wife, and when Jane didnt give the antidote, dosent it mean that EVEN though she did have a antidote she couldve saved him but she didnt, which means she killed him with purpose, so all that Happend was the same murder in other ways,

Nr 1 poison in coffee with purpose and no antidote

Nr 2 poison in coffe by mistake, has antidote but let him die

See? They are both as horrible wife and husband as each other


This was my answeres to your dilemmas, i hope they were intersting enough

BTW, yes i can be this Serious, im not a no lifer, i have a fantasy and learn in school :/

Jack Bowe
09-14-2014, 10:34 AM
Mary is in a hospital lounge waiting to visit a sick friend. A young man sitting next to Mary explains that his father is very ill. The doctors believe that he has a week to live at most. He explains further that his father has a substantial life insurance policy that expires at midnight.

If his father dies before midnight, this young man will receive a very large sum of money. He says that the money would mean a great deal to him and his family, and that no good will come from his father’s living a few more days. After talking with him Mary can tell this man is in desperate need of the money to feed his family. The man asks Mary to go up to his father’s room and smother his father with a pillow.

Should Mary kill this man’s father in order to get money for the man and his family?

She shouldn't kill him. That's murder, it's wrong, it's unethical. And let's be honest, why kill for someone you JUST met, it could be a setup of some sort, who knows, Mary might be a suspected serial killer. But seriously, killing someone for money baffles me. You should have no say in who lives or who dies, if they want to die, they can but there is no need to get involved. I mean, you could talk to him and see if he understands the situation and agrees to "pull the plug" so to speak, but as you already said; he should think more about spending time with his father in what may be in his last moments rather than the expiration date of an insurance policy.


You are the network administrator for a rather large company. You have a young family and need your job to support them. Part of your responsibility as a network administrator is to monitor the emails for the organization. Usually this just means occasionally allowing through emails for staff members that have been accidentally blocked by the spam filters.

One day you get a helpdesk request from a staff member asking for an email to get released. Normally it’s standard procedure, except this time the request has come from the wife of a very good friend of yours. You recognize the name on the helpdesk request so quickly attend to the problem. As part of the procedure you need to manually open up the email to ensure that it isn’t actually spam. You find that it turns out to be an email to your friend’s wife from her lover. You scan the rest of the contents of the email and there is no doubt that she has been having an affair for some time now.

You release the email, but you can’t decide what to do now. Your initial reaction is to call your friend up and tell him about the email, however you quickly realize that company policy is very strict about revealing the contents of staff emails, and you will certainly lose your job if your boss finds out.

In any case you know that revealing this information presents great risk, because even if you don’t do it directly, there is a good chance that the dots will be joined somewhere along the line and you will be found out. However you feel that by not telling your friend you are helping his wife to get away with adultery and this troubles you greatly.

What should you do?

The exact same thing you said: Tell them, but indirectly. Just bring it up, tell them you have a suspicion but don't reveal anything about the email itself. This makes you stay within the conduct of the workplace rules and help out your friend in his problem, he gets good advice, you keep your job. That's a win-win in my book.


You and your family are going away for the weekend. Your daughter is 7 and is best friends with your niece, who is also 7. Your families are very close and your daughter asks if your niece can come with you on your holiday. You have been on holidays together before and don’t see any problem, so you agree.

You arrive at your holiday destination and the house you are staying at backs onto a beach. The girls ask if they can go for a swim. You tell them that they have to wait until you have unpacked the car, but they can play on the sand directly in front of the beach. They run down to the sand, and you begin to unpack the car. After about 5 minutes, you hear screaming coming from the direction of the beach and it sounds like the girls.

You run down to see what the matter is, and you discover that they hadn’t listened to you and have gone for a swim. There is no one else on the beach and the girls are caught in a rip tide.

The girls are really struggling, particularly your niece who isn’t as strong a swimmer as your daughter is. You swim out quickly, but when you get there, you realize that there is no way you will be able to get both the girls back to the shore on your own.

You need to decide which of the girls you will rescue first, you have enough strength and energy to rescue them both, but you can only do it one at a time. You look at the two girls, and your niece is really struggling to hold her head above water and you know if you take your daughter back first, there will be little or no chance that she will survive.

Your daughter is struggling also, but is much stronger in the water and you estimate that if you take your niece back to shore first, there’s probably a 50% chance that your daughter will be able to stay afloat long enough for you return, but you simply don’t know how long she will hold on for.

Who should you save first?

I really don't think I can answer this one just yet, it will require a lot of thought. Let's think about it, my daughter would mean the utter world to me, that's what I would think of instantly, but if she could survive and I could save the niece also, that would be great, right? But let's think of my other point about my daughter meaning the world to me, wouldn't the other girls father feel the same way? So I am taking away something he would most likely die for, when I could do it to my own instead. (Sounds really bad, I know, just think of it like this: You have your own toy and your friends toy which you broke both of, you can only repair one. I'd repair my friends because at least I am responsible for my own and not responsible for the harm of something which isn't mine). However, I just can't really seem to find a proper answer for this one; my head is going crazy thinking of all the points for both of them.

But I have to say my own daughter, I could NEVER sit there and watch what would be my little girl suffer and then think about me being responsible for what would be my life for the rest of it.


Tom, hating his wife and wanting her dead, puts poison in her coffee, thereby killing her. Jane also hates her husband, and would like him dead. One day her husband accidentally puts poison in his own coffee, thinking it is cream. Jane realises this, and has the antidote that could save him, but does not hand it over and her husband dies.

Is Jane’s failure to act as bad as Tom’s action?

Yes, it is. The failure to save someones life when you can and the wanting to kill somebody are technically the same. Within both you decided if they live or die thus they are the same in ridiculousness, in my eyes. And like you said, they wanna kill their spouses, ever heard of a divorce? I could understand if one would overreact to a divorce, but I mean they both want each other dead, it would be a win for both of them.

GummiBear64
09-14-2014, 10:43 AM
I'm with Jack.

Reserving this particular spot until I can think clearly.

IAmABrodie
09-14-2014, 10:27 PM
Just to make clear, the first one doesn't insinuate that the family WILL die if they don't get the money, it's an assumption. And loving the answers thus far, I've read through all of them. It's pretty cool looking at situations in another persons' eyes, haha.

IAmABrodie
09-16-2014, 03:10 AM
Bumping this post