Moral and logical decisions.

[JustaJ]

What happens if the child dies before you make a decision?

[RadioKid]

Me: Let's say an old granny is crossing the road, and suddenly a car swerves and is about to hit her. You have the chance to save this old woman, but you know, that if you do a child will die because of that choice. What do you do?

I'm still wondering about the situation here.

1) what is the cause and effect of the old lady and the "child"?
1-a) which "child are you talking about? is it a certain child? or any child might die somewhere?
1-b) If the old lady dies, the "child" lives forever?
2) How the person (who may/may not help the old lady) know the cause and effect between the old lady and the "child"?

I'm sorry if these are explained already.

[Salvanas]

Originally Posted by RadioKid

I'm still wondering about the situation here.

1) what is the cause and effect of the old lady and the "child"?
1-a) which "child are you talking about? is it a certain child? or any child might die somewhere?
1-b) If the old lady dies, the "child" lives forever?
2) How the person (who may/may not help the old lady) know the cause and effect between the old lady and the "child"?

I'm sorry if these are explained already.

The example was meant to be a broad example, one that you're meant to look at, and just answer the question. Nit picking at the situation only bring up useless details that shouldn't even be there.

There is no link between the child and old lady. It's not a certain special child, it's just A child. And I do't know if the child will live forever. Sometimes there are questions, that should be answered and looked at without trying to know all the details.

I mean, shit, if we go into details might aswell ask questions like; "What is the chance of a plane coming down and killing the boy?" or "What is the chance of the car missing the lady, and hitting you?"

If it makes people better, I'll put it this way.

You're walking down the road, and you have a vision from God. The vision shows the street in front of you, and God tells you that a car will pull out and hit an old woman, killing her. It is your choice to save her. However, he says, if you DO save her, she will later on in life, kill an innocent child.

What do you do?

Is that better?

Must there be a reason and cause to everything?

[Quailboy]

It seems like people certainly are dwelling to deeply into this..

[ozkai]

Originally Posted by Salvanas

The example was meant to be a broad example, one that you're meant to look at, and just answer the question. Nit picking at the situation only bring up useless details that shouldn't even be there.

There is no link between the child and old lady. It's not a certain special child, it's just A child. And I do't know if the child will live forever. Sometimes there are questions, that should be answered and looked at without trying to know all the details.

I mean, shit, if we go into details might aswell ask questions like; "What is the chance of a plane coming down and killing the boy?" or "What is the chance of the car missing the lady, and hitting you?"

If it makes people better, I'll put it this way.

You're walking down the road, and you have a vision from God. The vision shows the street in front of you, and God tells you that a car will pull out and hit an old woman, killing her. It is your choice to save her. However, he says, if you DO save her, she will later on in life, kill an innocent child.

What do you do?

Is that better?

Must there be a reason and cause to everything?

I'm sorry, but I agree with RK. My mind boggles and I'm wondering if your's does to.

[RadioKid]

Originally Posted by Salvanas

The example was meant to be a broad example, one that you're meant to look at, and just answer the question. Nit picking at the situation only bring up useless details that shouldn't even be there.

There is no link between the child and old lady. It's not a certain special child, it's just A child. And I do't know if the child will live forever. Sometimes there are questions, that should be answered and looked at without trying to know all the details.

I mean, shit, if we go into details might aswell ask questions like; "What is the chance of a plane coming down and killing the boy?" or "What is the chance of the car missing the lady, and hitting you?"

If it makes people better, I'll put it this way.

You're walking down the road, and you have a vision from God. The vision shows the street in front of you, and God tells you that a car will pull out and hit an old woman, killing her. It is your choice to save her. However, he says, if you DO save her, she will later on in life, kill an innocent child.

What do you do?

Is that better?

Must there be a reason and cause to everything?

I will help her because I believe in neither Fate nor God.

Must there be a reason and cause to everything?

Yes, there must be. Even if no one is responsible to explain it.

[noodle]

This question doesn't make too much sense to me. For me, like most people (I'd like to think), if something is morally good, generally it is also logical. Otherwise it seems like you're trying to imply that Evil = Logical and Good = illogical??? If you mean something else, then apologies... I'm simply misunderstanding.

In your example, the only morrally good thing to do is try to save both. That is also the only logical answer for me because there are too many factors involved... e.g. like Nyoronin pointed out, you don't know that the child will have a full life.

If I HAD to choose one because one is guranteed to die and one is guranteed to live a long time afterwards no matter what, then I couldn't decide... I'd have to be living it to decide.


You're walking down the road, and you have a vision from God. The vision shows the street in front of you, and God tells you that a car will pull out and hit an old woman, killing her. It is your choice to save her. However, he says, if you DO save her, she will later on in life, kill an innocent child.

In this situation, I still wouldn't know what to do, but for discussions sake, I'd save the Granny. If you meant this kind of situation, you should've just discussed Minority Report or Capital punishment. lol.

[darksyndrem]

If it was just some random child, then I wouldn't know the child was going to die right? So, I would want to save the granny, but seeing a car about to hit her, and stuff, I think I'd be too shocked. I think I would try to save her, but not even be able to move because of the shock

[RadioKid]

If this discussion has religious pre-condition, I will stop discussing.

Assume that there is a limitation for the number of soul or population on earth for some biological or other reason. It means a new pregnancy need someone's death.

With such assumption, government will build up a system to kill some people to secure new babies. It is very logical, right?

In fact, we had such system in some area of Japan not by biological reason but by the starvasion. It was filmed as "La Ballade de Narayama" and awarded in france in 1983.

[vaskajaheta]

i have one for you...

2 rooms and you get to pick one of em...
Room1- your told that some one you know are locked up. you dont know who, only that you know him/her
Room2- 20 ppl you have never seen
the ppl in the room you pick wont get killed, what do you do??