• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Life Raft

Only room for 1, make your choice.

  • Pregnant Lady

  • Killer in cuffs


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
Perhaps so, but far from ridiculous. Of course, she might take up more space than a woman of similar age and build or even a convicted killer.

Men on average are larger and bulkier than women. So a full grown man and a pregnant woman are going to be a bit equal as far as weight.

Who would you choose?

I chose the pregnant woman. Its possibly saving 2 lives, the mothers and the childs.

The convict will get a life jacket or any other floatable that can be spared. But he is not worth potentially sinking the life raft, endangering all survivors, by overburdening it with more passengers than it's made for.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
But baby is tender. Give me my baby back, baby back, baby back.
I suspect that you might be....
giphy-downsized-large.gif
 

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
I am going to up you. You have a teenage boy, an orangutan, , a hyena, wounded zebra and a ****ing adult Bengal tiger aboard a life raft. Who do you throw out?
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Men on average are larger and bulkier than women. So a full grown man and a pregnant woman are going to be a bit equal as far as weight.
That is sound reasoning and entered into my thoughts on this as well, though I work with a full grown man that cannot weigh more than 125 pounds and with several women that exceed that by many pounds, though I would never bring that up.

We really do not know, since the information is not supplied and the possibilities are all open.



I chose the pregnant woman. Its possibly saving 2 lives, the mothers and the childs.
Seems reasonable and was included in my thinking as well.

The convict will get a life jacket or any other floatable that can be spared. But he is not worth potentially sinking the life raft, endangering all survivors, by overburdening it with more passengers than it's made for.
I reckoned similar thinking about the convict, except the part about his life not being worth saving to the point of discarding him. Perhaps his was one mistake. We do not know why he killed or whom. Murder is a legal definition and while killing is killing, murder can be many things.

I would still opt to sacrifice myself if the choice is purely moral. This allows for potentially saving three people at the cost of my life.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
I am going to up you. You have a teenage boy, an orangutan, , a hyena, wounded zebra and a ****ing adult Bengal tiger aboard a life raft. Who do you throw out?
The teenage boy. You ever try to feed one of those. They eat everything and cost a fortune. Though I would feed him to the tiger. No need to waste a perfectly good teenager. Orangutans are too cool to throw out. Besides, we may need to make a left turn Clyde.
 

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
That is sound reasoning and entered into my thoughts on this as well, though I work with a full grown man that cannot way more than 125 pounds and with several women that exceed that by many pounds, though I would never bring that up.

We really do not know, since the information is not supplied and the possibilities are all open.



Seems reasonable and was included in my thinking as well.

I reckoned similar thinking about the convict, except the part about his life not being worth saving to the point of discarding him. Perhaps his was one mistake. We do not know why he killed or whom. Murder is a legal definition and while killing is killing, murder can be many things.

I would still opt to sacrifice myself if the choice is purely moral. This allows for potentially saving three people at the cost of my life.
Then the convict is let loose and kills all aboard the raft in order for him to have all the supplies. Is this what you would sacrifice your life for?
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Then the convict is let loose and kills all aboard the raft in order for him to have all the supplies. Is this what you would sacrifice your life for?
It is my life and my call. The convict could just as easily be positively effected by my sacrifice and do his best to ensure everyone else survives. Besides, we do not know who else is on the raft and if they would so easily be doomed to fall to the lone convict.

This question was framed to extract a solution based on morality. Laying down your life for others is an extremely moral solution.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Nope flight crew is dead. Make a decision if you are capable.

The flight crew is dead? Well, that's new information which wasn't included in the original scenario.

Other considerations which would likely be known to any surviving passenger:

How far is the crash site from dry land? Can an imminent rescue be expected? Or is it something that might take hours, days - or even not at all?

I'm also wondering about the circumstances of the crash. When I've heard of planes crashing into the ocean, usually everyone aboard is lost.

They say that you can use your seat cushion as a floatation device, but assuming that the aircraft doesn't break apart on impact, how much time does one actually have from the time of impact in order to evacuate the aircraft before it sinks to the bottom of the ocean?

Depending on if/how many passengers survive the impact, there would be injuries and people panicking to get out of that doomed flying tube (and as usual, there would be those slowing up the process by taking their own sweet time getting their carry-on luggage).

At least before the flight crew died and while they were descending to almost certain death, they likely would have advised all the passenger to don their life vests, as shown here:

1*zFSq7UmMYU1-wBuqhYBPqg.gif


So, they would have had life vests and seat cushion floatation devices, in addition to rubber rafts (as you outlined in your OP). Another consideration might be the temperature of the water and the danger of hypothermia.

As for what choice I would make? I would not choose a flight which goes over the ocean. When I fly, it will only be over dry land. That way, if we crash, we all die together.
 

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
The teenage boy. You ever try to feed one of those. They eat everything and cost a fortune. Though I would feed him to the tiger. No need to waste a perfectly good teenager. Orangutans are too cool to throw out. Besides, we may need to make a left turn Clyde.
You obviously never read The Life of Pi. Once the hyena which is the monster in all of us kills the injured zebra and then is attacked by the orangutan for doing such thing because the orangutans hates what the hyena did and then the hyena then kills the orangutan and the tiger kills the hyena. ****ing moral theory in a nutshell. Whom among us would not do the same thing?
 

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
The flight crew is dead? Well, that's new information which wasn't included in the original scenario.

Nope

I didn't give the information because there was none to give. All information available has been told to you. Make a decision.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
I think she'd eat him alive, perhaps with a side of....
morley-candy-makers.jpg
I wouldn't join her for dinner, but the pre-meal show and preparation might be an interesting watch. Macabre and bit surreal, but interesting.

I liked the movies, ”Eating Raoul" and "301/302", so I probably would not be shocked.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Men on average are larger and bulkier than women. So a full grown man and a pregnant woman are going to be a bit equal as far as weight.



I chose the pregnant woman. Its possibly saving 2 lives, the mothers and the childs.

The convict will get a life jacket or any other floatable that can be spared. But he is not worth potentially sinking the life raft, endangering all survivors, by overburdening it with more passengers than it's made for.
But then you go against the premise in the OP. You have to save the convict.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
You obviously never read The Life of Pi. Once the hyena which is the monster in all of us kills the injured zebra and then is attacked by the orangutan for doing such thing because the orangutans hates what the hyena did and then the hyena then kills the orangutan and the tiger kills the hyena. ****ing moral theory in a nutshell. Whom among us would not do the same thing?
Never heard of it.

Your morals are different from mine. Mine are not so biologically diverse. Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck and Wile E, Coyote are my spirit guides.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Nope

I didn't give the information because there was none to give. All information available has been told to you. Make a decision.

Well, the thing is, if this thing actually happened and I was actually there in that kind of situation, there may be any number of other factors and considerations in play which might temper or influence whatever decision I might make - even assuming that I'd be in a position to make such a decision in the first place. (I'd probably be scared to death and in a panic, screaming "WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!")

I suppose if we follow the traditional "women and children first" rule, then the pregnant woman would be chosen over any man, regardless of whether he was a convicted killer in cuffs or not. The way the scenario is constructed, it makes the choice somewhat obvious.

I guess one could change it around it a bit. You could have the pregnant woman as the killer in cuffs, while the man is some famous celebrity or musician. Then it changes things a bit. Or the pregnant woman could be an uneducated fast-food worker, while the man could be a famous scientist or professor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top