Life or death conundrums.

Cris

Cris

In search of Immortality
Valued Senior Member
This was originally part of a post in the religion forum but I think it has a real place here.

How far would you go to risk your life to protect one of your children? If you don't have any children then consider a loved one instead. The scenario is that you and your child/loved one are shipwrecked and are the only survivors. The only hope for survival is a single lifebelt that will only support one of you. Do you take the lifebelt for yourself or do you give it to your child/loved one? Neither of you can swim so you know that one of you is going to die within a few minutes.

Who do you choose to let live and why? Consider this from the perspective of having a conviction that an after-life exists and then from the conviction that there is no after-life.

Another scenario: Your well-loved family pet (say a dog) (I hope you love animals, otherwise this scenario may not have so much impact), has fallen into a rough sea and is in danger of imminently being drowned. A man, a complete stranger to you has also fallen into the sea and is also about to drown (assume a non-swimmer). You are perfectly able to save either of them but not both.

Who do you choose to save and why?

Cris
 
Cris ...

Makes for possibly interesting conversation over a couple of beers but do any
of us really know what we would do in the circumstances given?

So, never having experienced the senarios proposed, I'd have to answer: Damned
if I know. And, to be perfectly honest, hope not to have to find out.

Guess my initial response to your post was: Oh no! Not another 'What
would you do if you came home and found your wife in the sack with your
best friend?' But on a higher plane naturally.

Take care. ;)
 
Hate to do this to you, Cris. The examples don't work for me. Why? Well if there is a life jacket, I give it up. If I am clothed then I have the ability to effect rescue for both of us. If not then I still have that ability through a method called drown proofing. I take it hypothermia is not a problem as both would die then anyway.

As for the dog senerio, almost all dogs can swim for some time. This buys time to once again effect rescue for all involved. Quite a few things you normally wear can be made into an instant life preserver. Boots, shirt, pants, ect. Any of these will keep you afloat for days on end with proper attention.
 
Last edited:
Wet1

That’s cheating. You need to answer the intent of the question and not figure out ways to create a question you would prefer to answer.

The issues are difficult. If you don’t like the scenario I have painted then construct your own that poses the same difficult personal choice and answer that.

Chagur,

I believe that being prepared for many eventualities helps with my continued survival. For example what would I do if I was attacked and my life threatened, would I hesitate to kill to defend myself?

Similarly in accident situations, or where others ask me for help.

Thinking through many of these conundrums led me to my decisions to push for uploading technology – it is the result of a long series of considerations of what would I do if…..?

Knowing what to do in difficult situations avoids hesitation at times when hesitation might well be fatal. Most people don’t prepare and die accordingly.

There are many situations that we can’t practice because where death is concerned you only ever get the one chance. So your only hope of doing the right thing is to figure out what you would do before it occurs.

However, I know your wit is sharp and you are very perceptive, and I would welcome more wisdom from you on this if you have more.

Cris
 
If you are looking for the intent then I have to answer I truely do not know. Nor do I think most will answer with what they will actually do until it confronts them.
 
wet1,

Thanks and I suspect you are right. Also, if they knew they would put themselves first, as in the first example, would they be prepared to admit it here? A conundrum within a conundrum.

Cris
 
I would say that my first responce would be to try and figure a way to save all involved. I know me and that is always first consideration in any life threating scenerio. Being a trained first responder seems to always being that to the forefront. It was not my purpose to dodge the intent issue but rather to say that maybe some examples are better than others. So I took the examples literally.
 
Hey wet1,

Sorry I didn't mean to sound like I was giving you a hard time.

I think your reaction demonstrates what most would do or want to do. But how long would you wait before realising that a choice had to be made. In this contrived scenario hesitation or trying to save both would result in both lives being lost, and perhaps that is an acceptable solution.

How does one decide whoose life is more important than another?

Take care
Cris
 
Hmmm

OK.

Got to admit I don't know about the first one, but for the second, the person first, every time.
No question.
 
My cat

I'd save my cat over a complete stranger. Why? Because I have always asserted that my cat is "part of the family". In other words, she has the same rights as the humans with a couple of exceptions. Namely, there are two chairs from which I will move her: the one in front of my computer, and when she tries to sit her ass on my face. In other words, I treat her like anyone else in the family. (If she could type and operate the computer, she would have license to that chair, as well.)

I always save my family over complete strangers.

And yes, Cris, I'm going to cheat here, too: it's a shipwreck. Under solitary conditions, it's 'twixt me, myself, and I how I feel about choosing a cat over a human being. In other words, if I make it to the island and manage to live to be rescued, well, I should have some time to consider my choices and reconcile them as such. It would, admittedly, be difficult to look the other person in the eye as he drowned while I dove in after my cat. But such is the human conscience.

thanx,
Tiassa :cool:
 
In medical terms it is called triage. In that decisions must be made, often inadequate and visual, as to whom you will pick to save. Based on the most serious but with a chance to survive. After all if there are 14 people needing help and only you there you must choose.

If the situation can be brought into a scope to involve others, even under direction, more can be accomplished. If not then you are on your own and must do what you can.

In the case of the dog vs. person, I would pick the person, hard choice though it would be. For one if I have no choice, then a combination of self interest/survival would rule in this. I prefer dogs and understand what a hard decision this would be.

After thinking I believe this is the course I would follow. I have probably given more consideration to this than I should have but this is what I think the results would be.
 
WHY?

In my mind and this is just my opinion there is no way to equate the life of a pet over the life of a human. Somebody's son, someone's father.

I know now though that there are some people out there who I don't want to see if I fall overboard!;)
 
Cris

What a horrible scenario you have painted up. :(
But of course I would save my child to any cost, even my own life.
Why? Because it´s simply the right thing to do. The children always comes first. It´s so obvious to me that I can´t even come up with a philosophical reason for it. It´s instinct. There would be no time think in a situation like that.
And I would have to trust my instictin the other case too, which would be to save the human first. I´m not sure what the origin of that instict is, because I do think that all are equal, human, animals..everything. But maybe the origin of the instinct is to save the ones from our own race first or that since humans often have longer lives than animals in general, and can therefore be able to achieve more good and evolutionary aspect to the world.
Like the age and size and similarity to our own species of a living creature are essential aspects in our valuation of life.
 
Exactly.
I hold no animostiy to animals.

Someone once said to me that most aimals follow three basic directives.

Survival of the self.
Survival of the species,
Procreation.
 
Not necessarily;
Think about it. The three interact.
You can't procreate if you don't survive.
If you don't procreate the species dies.
 
Cris ...

Re. "I believe that being prepared for many eventualities helps with my
continued survival."
Agree. That is why years back I became a CD Radiological Monitor - Access to
a high r shelter, food, water, weapons and the instruments needed to assist
survival. Too lazy to get into building and outfitting my own bomb shelter (Ah
yes, those were the days).

Re. "... would I hesitate to kill to defend myself?"
Without the proper training, most likely.

Re. "Similarly in accident situations ... "
Having been a Vol.Fireman and on the Rescue Squad for quite a few years ...
You do what you have to do, and think about it after (which could include
heaving your guts when you realize what you'd done).

Re. "Knowing what to do in difficult situations avoids hesitation at times when
hesitation might well be fatal. Most people don’t prepare and die accordingly."
Again, agree ... except that I'd leave out 'at times'.

Re. "So your only hope of doing the right thing is to figure out what you
would do before it occurs."
Agree in part ... See following.

Re. "I would welcome more wisdom from you on this if you have more."
Of wisdom I have little (as you well know) but I'm somewhat of a sponge, so
I'll relate an experience:

Years back I was standing bridge watch with the Officer of the Deck whom I respected highly. It was a quiet, beautifully starlit night, perfect for thinking 'deep thoughts' when out of the blue he asked: 'Do you know what distinguishes a good Officer from a run of the mill, medeocre one?" Before I could come up with some trite, inane reply, he continued. "A good Officer would at a time like this be thinking of the things that could happen and what orders he would give if they did. They never happen just the way you imagined they might, but close enough so that you have an idea of what orders to give to get things rolling ... and that will give you time to assess the situation and give follow up orders that are more appropriate to that particular situation. When things happen you don't have the luxury of starting from scratch."

Fifty years later, I still remember his words (though not necessarily verbatum).

Take care. ;)
 
Chagur,

Thanks. The story pretty accurately sums up what I try to do.

Wisdom? You do yourself a dis-service. I certainly see something worthwhile in most things you say.

Take care
Cris
 
esp ...

I guess my problem is with 'three' drives basic to 'most' animals. I'd say:

Survive;
Find a mate;
Procreate.

And, depending on the species:

Protect the mate.

I just can't think of 'survival of the species' as being a 'basic drive' ... It's just
something that happens if the first three occur, and in the above order.

Take care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top