Baby Hitler and silly question

[MattersOfTheHeart]

Scenario is just a different version of a silly question.

"Hitler is before you, but as an infant. You possess the knowledge of all that he will indeed do. You also know history can not be altered if the baby is allowed to live. Do you kill the baby or let the baby live?"

Is this worth even answering? Does it tell us anything about ourselves as people, if we choose one answer over the other?

 

[LuisDantas]

I wouldn't kill him, because I am not convinced that the person of Hitler made much of a difference in World War II.

 

[Kerr]

Scenario is just a different version of a silly question.

"Hitler is before you, but as an infant. You possess the knowledge of all that he will indeed do. You also know history can not be altered if the baby is allowed to live. Do you kill the baby or let the baby live?"

Is this worth even answering? Does it tell us anything about ourselves as people, if we choose one answer over the other?

I wouldnt kill him, because there is no way I could know what would happen if I did.

 

[Titanic]

I would not kill him.

 

[Shermana]

Instead of killing him, put aside a fund to help him get into art school.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

It isn't fitting that the just descend to the level of the injust

 

[Titanic]

It isn't fitting that the just descend to the level of the injust

I would not kill him.

 

[BSM1]

Knowing that history would not change if the baby Hitler lived, I would hold it's little head under water until he quit bubbling. Also I would not lose a minute's sleep over this action. Unfortunately life presents a few tough decisions.

 

[freethinker44]

Scenario is just a different version of a silly question.

"Hitler is before you, but as an infant. You possess the knowledge of all that he will indeed do. You also know history can not be altered if the baby is allowed to live. Do you kill the baby or let the baby live?"

Is this worth even answering? Does it tell us anything about ourselves as people, if we choose one answer over the other?

I'm uncomfortable answering a question where I either kill a baby or let Hitler live, so I'm going to invent a third option where I don't kill the baby and Hitler doesn't become the horrible tyrant history teaches us. That way I can answer the question and still feel good about myself.


Not really, but this is how these hypothetical questions always end.

 

[LuisDantas]

There is a reason why Hitler attained so much power: people let him. And they might just as easily lend such power to Himmler, Goehring, who knows who else.

For all we know, without Hitler the communist germans might have risen to power and caused even more damage than the Nazis did.

 

[Skwim]

There is a reason why Hitler attained so much power: people let him. And they might just as easily lend such power to Himmler, Goehring, who knows who else.

For all we know, without Hitler the communist germans might have risen to power and caused even more damage than the Nazis did.

And I think this is the crux of the dilemma; unless one knows for certain that without Hitler the world would definitely be better off, killing him as an infant remains questionable. And I don't think such a drastic measure can hinge on a questionable outcome.

 

[MattersOfTheHeart]

If you knew without a doubt, millions of deaths would be prevented from killing the one baby. What does that change?
If you let the baby live, history will be the same and Hitler will order and orchestrate the death of many people. He will inspire and fear others into doing the same thing.

So, if we kill Hitler we do run the risk of something worse happening, but isn't the risk warranted, since we know for certain the result of letting him live?

 

[Skwim]

If you knew without a doubt, millions of deaths would be prevented from killing the one baby. What does that change?
If you let the baby live, history will be the same and Hitler will order and orchestrate the death of many people. He will inspire and fear others into doing the same thing.

So, if we kill Hitler we do run the risk of something worse happening, but isn't the risk warranted, since we know for certain the result of letting him live?

And that's the $64 question; the one essentially posed in the OP.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The problem I have with the hypotheticals is not in answering a hypothetical, which I'm fine with. It's in having my response to the situation deliberately limited to 2 unappealing choices. Life never restricts you in such a way.

But, under the guise of this particular hypothetical, I'm killing the baby. And when I have trouble sleeping at night (because I would), I can tour all the places his particular brand of hate didn't touch. I'll take my chances with an uncertain future over a certain Hitler.

 

[Kerr]

If you knew without a doubt, millions of deaths would be prevented from killing the one baby. What does that change?
If you let the baby live, history will be the same and Hitler will order and orchestrate the death of many people. He will inspire and fear others into doing the same thing.

So, if we kill Hitler we do run the risk of something worse happening, but isn't the risk warranted, since we know for certain the result of letting him live?

No, I dont think its worth the risk. But its also because I am very uncomfortable with starting to change history to eradicate our mistakes and darkest hours, because that will also affect the best of our moments.

 

[chinu]

The one who knows the result of keeping this baby hitler alive, surely also knows the result of killing this baby. Perhaps, the result of killing this baby would be more dangerous than that of keeping him alive ? who knows.

 

[chinu]

I wouldn't kill him, because I am not convinced that the person of Hitler made much of a difference in World War II.

If he would have made any difference, than what will make you to kill him ?

 

[LuisDantas]

If he would have made any difference, than what will make you to kill him ?

Knowing for a fact that it would be worth it, I suppose.

 

[Willamena]

Scenario is just a different version of a silly question.

"Hitler is before you, but as an infant. You possess the knowledge of all that he will indeed do. You also know history can not be altered if the baby is allowed to live. Do you kill the baby or let the baby live?"

Is this worth even answering? Does it tell us anything about ourselves as people, if we choose one answer over the other?

History has to run its course.

 

[Noguchi]

I would steal him from the cradle and travel with him through the world and hope that exposure to to world would change the future, which is always changing...

If he was still vindictive and zealous about the master race, I would let him take the frustration out on me.