Some people have hypothetical minds that like to debate what is right and wrong. Sometimes, however, what is right and wrong is not so clear, as is the case in a moral dilemma. Three years ago, Jamie Frater created a list of 10 agonizing moral dilemmas. Now that it’s so old, I think it’s time for 10 more. Be sure to tell us what you would do in each case.
You are stranded with thirty people on a lifeboat that is intended to hold only seven. No one can paddle this heavy boat and it is definitely going to sink, drowning everyone inside it. It occurs to you that you can save some of the people in the lifeboat by throwing all but the strongest rowers overboard. Do you think it would be morally permissible to save some people by throwing others overboard, especially seeing that, otherwise, everyone, including those thrown overboard, would have drowned anyway?
Your wife is suffering from a debilitating disease that has put her in constant and permanent pain and agony. Finally, one day, she decides that she really wants to die. However, her condition is such that she cannot die on her own. She is begging and pleading with you to help her commit suicide. This would, of course, be illegal. What would you do?
You are a child slave in Africa, laboring away 18 hours a day making rugs. One night, you have a dream: God comes down from heaven and tells you that no one, not one person in the world, is buying your rugs. Would you feel:
a. Disappointed and anguished because you truly are going through all this slavery for nothing, or
b. Pleased because no one is benefiting from your cruel treatment.
Slightly based on the trolley dilemma; there is a train that, much to your horror, is about to run over your own son, who has been tied to its track. It just so happens that you have only enough time to pull a lever which will send the train down an alternate track saving your son. However, you see that, tied to the other track, is your best friend, who recently saved your life and you have yet to repay him for doing so. What would you do?
You are living with your family in a scarce, poverty-stricken country. Where you live, there is no food bank, and you and your family are starving to death. One day, you are out trying to find some sort of food to nourish your family, when something miraculous (or problematic) occurs. You find a huge sack full of money that has fallen off the back of a truck. You realize this would be a fortune to your family, but there is one obvious catch. This money has to belong to someone else, and to take it and use it for your family would be stealing. You could explain your situation to the rightful owner of the money, but how can you know he’ll be a generous person? Would you:
a. Return the money to its rightful owner or
b. Take the money and use it to help your family.
One month ago, your 14-year-old daughter had a sleepover with her best female friend, which went very well and both girls had a good time. However, now, she is telling you that she is inviting her male friend over to do the same thing. Neither you, nor her, have ever viewed him as a boyfriend or an intimate partner of any kind, just a friend who happens to be male. He has agreed to come and stay with your daughter overnight, but you are worried that the event could escalate into teen sexuality and consider forbidding him to stay overnight, or telling your daughter not to invite him. Yet, you don’t want to be unfair to your daughter or her friend. She insists to you that he is just a casual friend and no sexual activity will occur. What would you do?
You and your friend are stranded on an island. Unfortunately, you are both fatally ill. It just so happens that you have an antibiotic that can cure your illness. Sadly enough, there is just enough antibiotic to save only one person. How could you and your friend choose which one of you will take the antibiotic? Do you think that either person who takes it will, or should, feel guilty for the other person dying, although if neither of you take it, you will both die?
You are a Judge presiding over the trial of an alleged bank robber, who you know is innocent. However, something terrible in your life has happened: The enemies of the robber have kidnapped your 9-year-old daughter and have held her hostage. You don’t know where she is. The police have tried to locate her to no avail. The kidnappers have left you an anonymous note saying that if you convict the robber, they will set your daughter free. You fear the kidnappers could be abusing or even torturing your child. What would you do?
You are a paramedic and you have been called to help a young boy who was in a car accident. On the way to the emergency, you get in an accident with your elderly uncle, who you know and love dearly. He is knocked out, but you are able to determine that he is probably not terribly injured and is likely to survive without immediate medical attention. However, if you stop to help your uncle, or even call backup, you know for sure that the boy will die. The only way you can save the boy is if you drive away immediately. Would you:
a. Stop for your uncle or
b. Leave and help the boy.
You are speeding in your car on a one-way street, through very thick woods with a mad gunman chasing you and shooting at you from behind. Up ahead, you see a pedestrian crossing the street. You figure you have enough time to stop to let him cross, but with the thick woods, you cannot drive around him. Would you:
a. Stop to let the pedestrian cross, even though you are being shot at or
b. Hit the pedestrian and continue speeding away from the gunman.
This is a true story that happened in World War 2. You are an inmate, imprisoned in a concentration camp. A guard tells you that you must choose one of your two children for him to take to the gas chamber. If you choose neither, he will take them both. What would you do? (Apparently, Sophie told him to take her younger daughter, she lost track of her older son, and she later committed suicide from the guilt of having chosen between her children).
#10: If there was no way of avoiding it, then toss the weaker people overboard.
#9: Is the condition curable? If so, I could give her sleeping pills to try and help ease the pain until she gets better. Otherwise I’ll euthanize her, and try to plead for mercy at the courts.
#8: b).
#7: Save my friend. I would not be alive without him, and so I wouldn’t be able to save anyone’s life without him.
#6: Take the money.
#5: Let the friend stay over. They probably are just friends, and even if intend to have *****, the boy would probably have a condom on him.
#4: I would leave it up to a coin toss as to who lives. Heads, I take the pill without telling my friend. Tails, I give him the pill, whilst lying about there being “two pills” so he won’t refuse my pill.
#3 is easy enough. Publicly announce that the trial has been “put off for three days” so I can privately contact the police. I would get the police to privately protect the innocent robber, and then ask them to try and find the robbers that took my daughter. At any rate, the innocent man will be saved, and with a bit of luck my daughter as well. Besides, they may be abusing my daughter, but they would want to keep her alive until I make a decision, so hopefully she can’t be hurt too badly.
2#: Leave and help the boy.
1#: Wait, this question implies that the gunman might not be in a car at all, which means that technically I should have outrun the gunman sometime ago. Either this means that the chase hasn’t been on for very long, the forest slowed me down, the gun is long-ranged, or the gunman is in a car as well. And where are the words “car chase”? They don’t appear at all, so it is implied the gunman isn’t driving. This is supported by the fact that, given enough time, I could get away from the gunman. Well, considering that I am still able to drive, this means the car hasn’t sustained ample enough damage to stop me yet, so either the chase hasn’t been going for very long as I have considered before, the trees provided protection, or the gunman is a poor shot. Well, I hadn’t been hit in the forest, so the trees probably provided good protection, protection which I might lack out in the street. It is quite possible that the gunman is a haphazard shot, considering that he is described as deranged, so if I keep my head low, I could turn around, put on the accelerator and drive over to kill the gunman. At any rate, the pedestrian would be saved.
Sophie’s choice has stumped me.
Yes, I was most verbose with question #1. My apologies
Great answers!
Such clever thinking in #1. NOBODY besides you has suggested that the gunman might not be driving, but, no, I had in mind that he is driving. Very original reasoning though.
I'd do anything to stop the wife's moaning.
Duct tape helps
I think the first list is much better. Nice try anyway!
I agree. I think the only moral dilemmas in this list are number 1 and the bonus. The others are way too easy.
#7. Choose between a friend and my child? Of course I'll choose to save my child. Not even a slight second thought here.
#6. Take the money to feed my starving family or return it? Only an insane person would let his family die of starvation just to avoid offending or even aggravating anyone.
#5. Daughter wants a male friend to sleepover – Hell no. End of story.
#4. Cure – I'll take it. Thanks
#3. Jail an innocent man to rescue my daughter – absolutely. I could find ways of helping him out later on when my daughter is safe.
You are a greedy, self-centered, selfish bastard.
That you wouldn’t let your daughter have a male friend sleep over eventhough the dilemma clearly states that she nor him ever saw him as a boyfriend or intimate partner, and that there most probably will not be any *****ual activity, shows you’re a selfish, irrational person who is unfair to his children. Be a better parent. The fact that you think children respond well to UNREASONABLE and arbitrary rules is rediculous.
And this is why we have teen pregnancy issues.
were did you grow up? I know that when i was a teen the one thing on my mind was S**! An the parents that did let guys come over an stay there daughters end up prago at an age were well they will end up on welfair an with no education.. a lot of this is just common no brainer
Being a better parent includes knowing when your kids are lying to you and conniving their way into getting what they want. Too bad.
Like so many situations in life, you never quite know how you will react until you find yourself in them. The exact same situation on a different day could yield different choices, different results .
In my opinion, this was weak. I might not even crawl across this poor of an article in my own random surfing of the net, let alone on Listverse. Not one of these gave me a moral dilemma longer than fifteen seconds.
Whoa You're so f*ckin smart. What's your answers on 1,2,4 and 7 ??
Or on Sophie's Choice?
2 is easy, the only outcome of leaving him there is he might be *****ed off with you, it says he is likely to survive without medical attention.
In fact half are easy the judge? The robber is going to jail not death row, and even if it was death row it would take years.
The sleepover? a) she is 14 only even if the situation were to lead to something else it is only the religious biggots who would have a problem. At that age she should know everything about safe *****, if not you fail as a parent and the issue is far bigger than a sleepover. The wife? She is permanent pain, if she wants to die and there is no hope of her recovering apart from a "miracle" then why not help her, or at least bring her to a country where eutanasia is legal (iirc Switzerland).
Sofie's choice is hard but from a logical standpoint the morally correct answer is "f you" making a choice means you have become a party to the evil. The money? Morally give it back, logically if your family desperately needs it keep it, it is not technically stealing because you happen across money that has been left there, you did nothing to separate the other party from their money, you simply failed to return it (and how would you go about that anyway? Bring it to the cops? What are the chances the cops won't just keep it themselves?)
Only religious bigots would have a problem with a 14 year old boy-girl sleepover? Have you read the comments? Pretty much everybody but you would say no. At 14, a child should not be having ***** – safe or not. It has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with intelligence and common sense.
I can just picture your daughter, pregnant at 14… then who would be the "fail as a parent"?
It is irrefutably bad policy to allow a 14 yea old girl to have a co-ed sleep over .
I really think it's more about knowing the kids in question. I was having co-ed sleepovers and not once did anything "happen" between myself and the guy(s) who stayed over. We actually were just best friends since early grade school, our parents knew each other, and they rightfully trusted us. We'd watch TV, eat pizza, play video games and pass out on the couch.
It would have to be a situation like that for me to allow it for my daughters (they're both too young right now to even want sleepovers at all). I'm not counting out the possibility of saying "over my dead body", I'm just saying it shouldn't be an automatic rejection because of their ages.
I had sleepovers with my two guy friends many times. Nothing *****ual ever came from it. As long as your daughter isn't some slut who sleeps around with whoever, and hopefully as a parent you taught them correctly, you should have no issues allowing her to have a boy over.
It would depend alot on the maturity of your daughter, to be honest. If she is mature enough to handle herself appropriately, why not? But having said that, the high teen pregnancy rates show that 14 year-olds are not really that mature. so say no
Has anybody considered the possibility that the boy might be gay? It isn’t said either that the boy would sleep in the same bed. How many people would be comfortable having ***** in their parents house while their parents were at home – even as adults? There’s also a big clue in that the girl never mentioned this boy as a boyfriend.
And Liz, the dilemma CLEARLY states there most probably will NOT be any *****ual activity going on. Why are you acting like the question is “Should you let your 14 year old daughter have *****?”. It’s not. It’s a trust question, and you’ve shown that you don’t trust your child regardless of how unlikely it is that she’ll have *****. Great parenting there. Children do not respond well to unreasonable and arbitrary rules.
Woah Nato!!! Um, yeah I am not religious as a matter of fact I’m an atheist and I have a 10 and 12 year old. It is inappropriate to allow a sleep over no matter how much you think you have taught your children. It is a fail if you do allow it as you are responsible for what happens in your home. And I’m sorry at 14 it is natural to be “curious.” Platonic friends are also a good source of exploration for that age. Were you not 14 once? I was. Absolutely not, inappropriate. Has nothing to do with religion and all to do with common sense and understanding the complexity of raging teenage hormones! It’s the parents that allow such that get “Um…mom, dad, I’m pregnant!”
@David, I boinked in my parents house. No, I didn’t get pregnant but I sure did sneak my boyfriend over after bed time.
…i cant choose right now, i'm confused!
I just wanted to correct the author that ”Sophie’s Choice” is a novel, written by William Styron, which was the basis of the film. Because, it is a fiction, probably, it never really happened in real life, like the author described.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie's_Choice_(novel)
i just wouldn't let the boy sleepover.
…i agree.
simple as that, after all you ARE the parent.
And saying “simple as that, I AM the parent” to your child get’s a great response every time, doesn’t it? Children totally don’t want to rebel against rules they percieve as arbitrary, right? Not to mention rules that ARE arbitrary. Great parenting, guys.
We all know that “Bob’s” daughter is going to end up pregnant everyone get ready for her to be on Teen Mom next.
I would not let the boy sleep over, especially if my daughter was only 14. I think that is even a stupid question.
An even stupider question is the train track dilemna: who would REALLY choose someone over their own child? Even if it IS your best friend. Also, I'm pretty sure that if they really were your friend, they would not expect you to choose their life over your son. I can't even believe that is a question on here.
" I'm pretty sure that if they really were your friend"
Im pretty sure there isnt a "Real friends moral code book and guidelines". While its obvious that everybody will choose their son, i also think that if the friend shouts to save him, you cant say when the ordeal was over, that he never was a real friend.
Im also pretty sure that personal survival trumps friendship.
What if you're a woman and he's your husband? My husband is my best friend and he did save my life so my brain immediately chose that interpretation. Very hurtful thought, but not much of a moral dillemma because I wouldn't let the train run over my son, and my husband would argue the same point with me if I once thought otherwise.
obviously you do not realize that you can have another son, but not another friend whom will save your life.
The train track dilemma is more a matter of whether it's moral to place your child's life ahead of someone else's life, even though most people are obviously going to choose to save their kid.
i would stop for the crossing pedestrian and reverse my car.
I would beep the horn…
Exactly my action!
These are horrible. Why is it a moral dilemma to chose between stopping to help an Uncle who you know is "not terribly injured", and helping a young boy in terrible danger. Cruddy at best and agree whole heartedly with FlamieJamie.
10. I'd start chucking people over the side. Better that some live rather then everyone die. The real question is if I'd jump over myself if I weren't one of the best rowers. Who am I kidding? if I'm strong enough to throw 23 unwilling people over the side of a life boat I'm sure that I can row like a champ.
9. I'd give her a week to sleep on it and if at the end of that week she still wanted me to help her kill her self I would honor her wish.
8. Pleased because no one is benefiting from your cruel treatment. Also without a market for the rugs there is a good chance that you will just be another mouth to feed and you will either be set free or killed. Its almost a win win since you are in a world where God is a certainty so you will either be free or in heaven. Unless of course your crummy master has a side business he needs free labor for, or he sells you to someone else.
7. I'd kill my best friend. This one is pretty subjective, depending on your friends but I know for a fact my best friend would understand, and likely do the same thing if our roles were reversed. Honestly if I were the one tied to the tracks I'd rather die then have his child on a conscious.
6. Too many variables involved to answer this one properly. What country? What channels would I have available to return the money? Is there a good chance I will be found out and killed if I try to spend the money? ect..ect..ect.. I guess my stock answer would be to use a tiny bit of the money to get food, and see where things develop from there in the coming weeks. Mainly find out where the sack may have came from and who is looking for it before making my final choice.
5. Once again too many variables involved. Without actually meeting the boy I cannot answer the question with the material provided.
4. Place the antibiotics 100 yards away, or another agreed upon distance, and then race for it. Who ever gets to it fist gets to take the antibiotics. Because who ever wins the race is most likely in better health and has a greater chance of survival.
3. You make the conviction, because if the police are already looking for the girl then they obviously know about the situation. Once your daughter is released there should be no trouble declaring mistrial since it seems that everyone in authority is already aware that you were black mailed into making the conviction in the first place.
2. Leave and help the boy. Though I am kinda curios why I can't continue to the boy and also call backup for my uncle. What kind of cheap town am I living in where the squads don't have radios.
1. Stop. Unless the guy is a crack shot or lucky he most likely won't hit you since he is going to be caught off guard, and have to break himself. By that time you should have enough time to get moving again before he can react.
Bonus: Attack the guards and die fighting. Yeah it won't save you, or your children but at that point you are all as good as dead anyway, and there is no reason to let the guard prolong the torment.
#2) Unfortunately as an EMT/Paramedic you don't really have a choice in what you do as you are bound by certain rules while on the job. You wouldn't leave you uncle at all due to Medical Abandonment. It is your responsibility to stay with a patient until you hand over custody to another medical professional, I can't remember the exact term.
That's really interesting. I wonder if there have been any court rulings on the subject when someone finds themselves in this real-life moral dilemma.
4. I know for a fact that I am quite a bit faster than my friend over 100 metres, and probably 200. Maybe even 400. But he's definitely in better shape than me, and running more than a few metres with a serious illness sounds like a bad idea to me to start off with.
and
3. The point of the dilemna is "would you sacrifice your child to free an innocent man?" Or vice versa, you're not supposed to pick both because there's some wriggle room in the story.
Likewise you have a similar problem with your take on number one I think.
And bonus? You would really sacrifice one of your children to help you commit suicide so you could have the satisfaction of having hit the guard of coouple of times?
4. Who said we were running all I said is that we were going to race depending on what shape we are in that could mean that we are crawling toward the medicine.
3. I didn't make up the questions I just answered them in the fairest way I could think of. If the person proposing the question gives me a chance at having the best possible outcome I'm taking it. Why sacrifice either the innocent man or the child if you don't need to? There is nothing here that states you must answer these questions with a simple point and click solutions. I was given a chance to save both people and took it.
1. There is no problem here I'm stopping my car, and playing the odds. Once again the question never stated that you would defiantly die if you chose to stop. So I'm taking the chance and hoping he misses.
Bonus: I don't think you understood the question. One of your children is already doomed either way, and there is no promise that the other child will live no matter which you choose. I attack the guard because I'd rather die than be forced to make the choice. Especially since the alternative is likely living a little longer with horrible guilt, while being herded around like live stock waiting for my turn in the gas chamber.
Well, sometimes there's a third option. Captain Kirk does it all the time.
lOVE THE ANSWER TO #10, HAD A GOOD LAUGH. tHANKS
First of all I'm new Hi
Second Merry Christmas!
10 Throw them, since there is at least a chance for some to survive.
9 Well to stop her moaning ,I would kill her but make it look like a suicide.
8 Who ever I work for is a effin bad businessman.
7 Is this Dastardly and Muttley?
6 Well, your joy should not ever come from anothers misery,but then again someone with this lot of money would'nt mind seeing he might be a rich bastard
5 He's probably gay .
4 We'll die together. How bout a hug. Maybe a little kiss? Now grab his crotch.
3 A life in exchange for the freedom of another? Obviously save her.
2 I ran over my uncle?
1 I'm pretty sure Spiderman can get out of the way
I laughed out loud after reading your answer for number 1
Plus Spiderman can save you from the gunman anyway! So you'd better at least try to swerve around him. ; )
#2
No, more likely, you ran into your uncle. Maybe, you began a turn and you T-boned his car or something, or hit his car from behind, something to give him a jolt or some minor injuries.
I'm pretty sure that accidents involving an elderly pedestrian and a fast vehicle are virtually always fatal as the elderly are frail and very fragile.
I find this list silly.
I've been a regular on Listverse for almost a year, and it all started when I did a Google search for Moral Dilemmas for an assignment I was doing, and found the first list.
This list may not be as good as the first, but still plenty to think about.
The Sophie's choice one in particular gave me goose bumps, especially since there were probably hundreds of similar scenarios during WWII
Worst, list, ever?
It's like deja vu all over again.
Not really, seen far worse. Benefits of capitalism anyone?
Here's a twist for the Daughter's Sleepover dilemma: What if the daughter's a lesbian and I don't know it?
If your daughter knows her friend is a lesbian and is cool with it why not?
No…'meh' is saying that it's the daughter that's the lesbian.
That wouldn't affect the situation at all. The dilemma is in the father's (your) head, whatever you don't know shouldn't affect the problem at all, the choice is about trust in the first place and as you don't know the daughter is a lesbian it wouldn't affect your decision at all.
what is wrong if they have some kind of intercourse? gay or straight?
What if, indeed. Even non-lesbian teenage girls 'experiment' together sometimes (some, not all, I know). At 14 if two girls are fooling around, it's likely to be relatively innocent anyway, and even if they're fully 'into it', hopefully they know enough to be 'safe' about it in terms of stds, and it's not like someone's going to wind up pregnant… So I fail to see it as a 'big deal', honestly.
#10- my mind tells me to stay and try to keep the boat afloat even if it wont work. #9-this situation just sucks all together, but if i knew for sure that she couldn't take it any longer and no known medication helped her, i would have to help her die.
#8- probably b…in a strange way…but neither matters, if i am a slave chances are that i will continue making rugs until i am told to do something else.
#7- I'd pull the lever to save my son…being part of my family means i will protect them, period.
#6-if the money is all bills i take it and help my family. worse come to worse, what can really happen? they take it back? we were already broke to begin with so its worth a shot!
#5-NOT HAPPENING! that's a soft spot for me. Not till shes old enough to go against my word is that going to happen unless I've known the kid his whole life and i trust him….and god bless him if he breaks my trust!
#4-This one depends on who I'm leaving behind vs. who he's leaving behind. I would probably take it if i knew i had a family of my own to care for. sad as it is.
#3-I will do anything for my family. But if the bastards didn't deliver, there would be some serious hell to pay, and i would die trying to get her back safely.
#2-Again, family comes first. (stressing the family thing, getting redundant at this point) A terrible dilemma though it is, a family member takes precedence over those outside.
#1-This is an interesting one, being a C.C.W holder, I assume I would have my sidearm with me. I would stop short of the innocent pedestrian and attempt to save both our lives by choosing to fight. However (and again) if my family is in the car with me the pedestrian is S.O.L.
BONUS- I would tell them to take me instead.
This is a beautifully written list, Mr. Hopkins! Very much worthy of its predecessor!
I love these types of posts…
10. Yes, it is fine to throw some over to save the lives of other's as long as they are voluntary OR if it's a "we've got to pull straws" situation then as long as it is unanimous. I don't see how it wouldn't be as the options are "everyone dies" or "only a few die." I assume people would jump in for others… say if a kid chose the short straw, I have enough faith someone would jump in for them. It's a difficult situation and more would be needed to make any sudden decisions. If the waters were warm, everyone thrown overboard would use their body weight to float and hold unto the sides. (And more examples. Unsure if this site has a word limit so I'll end that there.)
9. I'd help her. This is assuming that she's suffering from incurably constant and debilitating pain. I would hope I'd be helped if this happened to me. One cannot function when in such pain nor can they think.
8. If I felt I were good at making rugs I'd feel disappointed that no one has enough sense to purchase a good item when they see it. The two options given probably wouldn't even go through my mind. If I were a slave, I'd not be thinking like that at all. (Who would?)
7. I'd kill my friend to save my son and make sure the friends left-behind loved ones are well cared for. It would be a split second decision… and to be honest that means I don't actually know what I'd do, though instinct tells me "save what is mine."
6. I would like to think I'd keep some or all of the money, though I always end up giving things I find back to their owner if possible. (When similar situations have come up in the past.) *is a sucker like that*
5. Yes, my daughter would be allowed to have a male friend over. (unless she's completely proven herself untrustworthy and loose in her ways) There would be rules to it (of course)… such as they cannot go to her room, they have to be in the living room or other common area and they are NOT allowed to build a forte or go into the restroom together. I may or may not also lead them to believe their interactions are being recorded.
4. We decide because I shove it down their throat. Hah… (well, not "hah' funny 'hah' though 'hah' as in 'gee whiz'). Would they feel guilty? No, because I'd do it by force… and might be a jerk about it so that they could blame me for my own demise. Takes the guilt out of the equation.
3. I'd publicly announce the verdict as "guilty" and place the prisoner in jail until my daughter was returned. Once she was, I'd release the prisoner.
2. A paramedic can call for backup while driving, as well there's always at least 2 on any call. This is a silly "dilemma" though I'd leave the uncle. He's fine. UNLESS he is in a dangerous spot… then I'd stop and move him , possibly letting my partner continue while I stayed (and risk being fired)… because under law I'm required to both continue and stop and help the uncle. It would be a tricky case if it went to court, though I'd take whichever route looked more safe. Tbh, I'd like to think I'd play this rationally, though I may not. It's more likely I'd stay with the uncle to make sure he's not seriously injured… though hard to make that call.
1. Hah, the pedestrian would get shot too, no? We're both dead no matter what, though I'd probably side-stop the car to get out with cover and run into the brush. Do the gunmen have dogs? If not, I'd just hide until they came by and … probably freak out and hold my breath and try not to cry and then do that last minute "screw it" and go for their achilles heel or something.
(Not that you actually wanted answers, though there you are.)
1 and 3. I don't think it works like that…
We get it. You don’t like people’s answers for 1 and 3.
I’m with him on this one. Judges don’t have almighty powers to just release prisoners. Worst comes to worst, they don’t give your child back, you lose oyur job, and the innocent person you just condemned would be sentenced to death.
Sorry but this list is extremly boring.
These situations have 2 simple answers.
Smart,modern people will chose themselves/their families over strangers.
Spiritual,ageing hippies will pick the others/strangers over themselves/their families.
I would class myself as a spiritual person Joshua but my family would always come first.
Oh quite the opposite. I am not spiritual, certainly not ageing, and definitely no hippie, but I would often pick strangers over family. Well, I would follow the utilitarian approach, if my family was being threatened and I had to choose between them and one stranger, I would choose to save my family due to the fact that I would be saving the greatest amount of happiness. However, if I had to choose between saving my family over 100 strangers, I would choose to save the strangers because doing so would again, would lead to saving the greatest amount of happiness and lives. We are all equal and our lives are all of equal value, personal preference should only be used as a second option, for example, if there were the same amount of strangers as there were my family members. Only in a scenario like that should you resort to personal preference.
That's very cold. You would rather save a 100 strangers than your own mother, brother or son? Do you think those people you saved would be happy that you sacrificed your family for them? I don't think so, dude. You are very confused if you equal life with happiness.
Oh, and by the way, Leo F: you are certainly ageing. Everybody is. Sorry if this is bad news to you.
Morality is subjective and personal to each individual. I wouldn't know for some of these what to choose, but any involving kids I would choose the kid over the adult. Including myself. As for the bonus, I would go together with the children as I wouldn't be able to pick only one….even to save myself. As for the rug one, I would be wondering more on why he choose to come and tell me something that silly instead of saving me or saying everything will be alright in the end to give me hope. Instead he says something along the lines of "the work you do is meaningless"…..that's just the height of tackiness.
in situation 9 You both can go to Switzerland – It's legal there, You can even find a comfortable institution for that
10. Toss them overboard – better some live than all die.
9. Help her die. (And then suffer the consequences of guilt for the rest of my life, but at least my lovely is at peace).
8. – A.
7 . – Bye, bye friend.
6. – This actually happened in the town I live in. A council cleaner found $75,000 which a senile lady had taken out of her bank (good security hey?). She hid the money in a park and he found it during his rounds. he gave it to the police andthey tracked th owner down. The lady's family sent him a letter of thanks – that's all – zip, nothing else. Lots of letters to the Editor after that.
5. – No guy is going to spend the night in my teenage daughters room. End of discussion.
4. – Unless it was mybrother – I take the cure.,
3. – Jail the robber.
2. – Help the boy – Unc's had a good and long life, and I'm sure he'd want it that way.
1. – Don't know.
BONUS(?) – God Almighty – I never want to face that scenario. Some people are f#cking evil.
No, a boy would almost 100% never share a room with my 14 year old daughter. As for just about every other situation, I would choose the one that would benefit me. Someone else dies, big deal. I do not care.
I would drown whoever, kill my wife, steal anything I need, let my best friend die, take the medicine, convict the innocent man, and run over the pedestrian. What good is morality over survival?
As for the slave question, I wouldn't give a *****, I am still a slave.
I’d love to see a list with more items like sophies choice. That one was interesting to read.
no.7 is funny cause you can basically shorten the question too;
if you had to choose one person over the other to live who woudl it be?
son or best friend who saved your life.
Not quite, because in flipping the switch, you’re actively killing your friend.
10. I would let everybody die. I just could not live with the thought of killing somebody. And besides, if it is fate, it is fate.
9. I would not kill her. This may sound cruel, but if she suffered all this time, she could suffer a little more. I absolutely do not support suicide.
8. b. I would be very pleased. Even though my labour is then futile, I would be happier to know that no one is enjoying my labour, showing it to their friends, etc.
7. I would save the friend. If he saved my life, it is just natural to save his, too. I am sure my child would find the strength to forgive me.
6. I would return the money. Though I would try to bargain for half the money, but if the person insists, I would return him the money.
5. I would let the boy sleepover. If they start doing something underage, why do you think I would not hear it?
4. OK, this may sound juvenile, but we would decide the survivor by playing " Rock, paper, scisors". Sometimes luck should decide.
3. I would convict the man, but the sentence would be the shortest legally possible.
Hopefully, that would make the kidnappers release my child.
2. Of course, save the boy. If my uncle is not even that badly injured, he could survive until I rescue the boy. And even if he does not, at least he has lived a full lifetime.
1. Of course, stop. Whad kind of bad luck would be needed for the gunman to hit me? And even if he does, at least I do not die a killer.
+ Me and my children would all die. It is horrible to have to choose between your children, and it is best to not make the choice at all.
9. Why not?
7. Really? Are you a parent?
Good point, surely Hana cannot have kids of his/her own.
I'm not a parent, but if I had the choice of saving my brother and my best friend who has saved my life, I would no doubt choose my brother. Every time. And do you think that the best friend would have saved you earlier would have done it if he could have saved a family member instead? No way.
I mean, I'd choose my Uncle Joe over my best friend. I would feel guilty, of course, but family just doesn't grow on trees. Friends do.
I thought most of these were easy to answer because a) your family comes first (except for the uncle) and b) you use common sense ( if you are skint and find lots of cash you thank God and take it). The only one I would have trouble with would be Sophies choice – I would probably launch myself at the guard and scream at the kids to run.
As for the pill on the island anyone who says they would give it to the other person is talking out of thier ar*e.
These are dilemmas?
10: "I can swim faster than this boat! Who's with me?!!!"
9: "honey, the insurance won't pay out for suicide. You'd best go find a bear"
8: "God? heh…I must be dreaming. I'd better get back to work"
7: Saving my life was HIS choice. There is no debt. Save my kid!
6: keep the money. It's not stealing. It's finding. No one would care if it were a sack of dog crap and I kept it. "hey! That's MY dog crap!!!"
5: Fair shmair! Screw that! Fair and children don't belong in the same sentence. is it fair that she has a period and her male friend doesn't? Life's unfair, kiddo. Maybe I should invite mommy's friend over for a sleepover too! It's only fair!
4: The pill is mine. He'll get over it.
3: Trust the word of a kidnapper? THAT makes sense! You steal my daughter, beat and rape her and now I'm supposed to trust your word? Sure.
2: "I'm workin' here!"
1: My life is really important to me. Even more important than Spiderman crossing the street in the woods.
Sophie: Kick that nazi prick in the nuts and tell him to go ***** himself. If he's going to kill one of my kids, what's to stop him from killing them both? Oh yeah, nazi bastards are men of honor and you can take their word as gold… Morally, it's not my choice as the kid's life isn't mine to barter with.
about your answer to "Sophie's dilemma": You forget that the guard is not there by himself. It doesn't matter if you kick him in the nuts or even manage to kill him, a dozen others like him are going to take his place if that happens. NOW, think again, would you like to save one of your kids? If, for some odd reason, you could trust the guard's word?
I'd kick him in the nuts for the mere suggestion of it. Not as any sort of solution.
As far as trusting them? Hell no. They're going to kill one of my kids…or both…or both and me. THEY have all the power. My decision is irrelevant. You said it yourself there's a dozen like him. So even HIS decision is at the whims of those other twelve guards who will do what THEY want.
No, the only power you truly have in that case is to kick the guard in the nuts and tell them to burn in hell.
Oh, and just to augment my sleepover dilemma, I WOULD let my wife's female friend sleep over in my 14-year old son's room. And it wouldn't matter if she was a lesbian or not.
Fair shmair.
Regarding number seven: Is there any parent that would consider this a moral dilemma in any way? Because if so, I would find that truly sad. Not only would my best f-ing friend be squashed under those train tracks, but if necessary, I would have let the train run over me as well. There is NO life above my child's. And that's IT in a nutshell. So, I'm sorry, but if your kid and my kid are drowning in a lake… I'm going for your kid after I get my kid to safety. That may seem ugly, but I'm being very honest. And I would expect the same response from you toward your own child.
Well, there's no dilemma for me, because I haven't got any kids…. or friends either… damn
NO life above your child? How about this alternate scenario,
What if it was your nephew (your brother's son) who was tied to the alternate track and your brother was tied to a nearby tree to see the going's on?
For me, regardless, it would be my son first. I know my brother would go for his son first if the roles were reversed. Add to that, my son is the only family I really have. If I up sticks and move, he comes with me. I’ve already had to do that twice. I wouldn’t be taking my nephew, or my brother, or my best friend. There’s been times my son has been all I’ve got.
Almost every parent will reply the same. No question asked
Are you sure? If I were in that situation, I would spare my nephew. While I would feel terrible about losing my son, I don’t think my brother would ever forgive me if I killed his kid, especially right before his eyes.
And I doubt your wife will ever forgive you for saving your nephew over your (and her) child. Your brother might be a bit miffed you aren’t looking out for your own kid, actually.
If anybody considers 9, 7, 6, 5 or 2 a moral dilemma in any way, I would find THAT truly sad.
Lame list.
And David, WHY would you save somebody else’s child, condemning your own child to certain death? Think of being a little kid, about to get run down by a train, and imagine your daddy who can save you, but simply will not and you’re too young (maybe) to understand why. Yeah, he’s your brother, but still, how could your own son be second place to your brother’s? I’m sure it would be horrible for your brother to lose his child, but he should understand, since he’d have probably saved his son.
Barney & Lou, there is a difference between killing and letting die. Without my action, my nephew would not have got run over. If I flip the switch saving my son, and my brother’s son gets run over, I will have actively killed someone. If my son and nephew were reversed and it was my nephew who was originally going to be run over, I would not turn the train, because I would actively be killing my own child and my son would take priority. It is not a matter of my son being second place, neither is it a matter of saving one over the other. It’s the fact that I would be the actual cause of my nephew’s death and my brother’s grief if I took on the action of killing his child to save mine. If it were a situation of my son and my nephew drowning in a lake, and whichever one I went for first, the other would surely drown and die, I would save my son first, since he’s my priority and both were originally in danger of death. On the other hand, where my nephew was not originally going to die from the train, I would have to sadly let him live and take on the burden of my son’s death. Maybe my wife would hate me, maybe my son may not be old enough to understand, but it would be better than effectively murdering the child of someone so close to me. If the other person were some kid I didn’t know of some parent I didn’t know, maybe then, I’d save my son, but not over the child of a sibling.
Of course you would run over the pedestrian!!!
If you did not, wouldnt the mad gunman just shoot him anyway???
No, not if the gunman was after you specifically, not the … eh.. Spiderman crossing the street.
The money "dilemma" is no dilemma to me. I would take the money without thinking twice. My family is more important than yours.
Especially if you have enough money to fill a bag with it and then leave said bag in the back of a truck.
Excellent list. My responses:
10: Survival of the fittest… unfortunate news for the weaker passengers, unless there are children on board. How could anyone throw small children overboard? The guilt and the nightmares would be unbearable. Therefore, keep the strongest and the children.
9. One of the easier ones… help her die and end the suffering. If that puts me in jail, so be it. That would be easier than watching her agony extended for God knows how long.
8. I would be pleased that nobody is benefiting from my suffering, but also a tad miffed that I had actually spoken with God himself… and all he did was fill me in on the world's black market rug trade.
7. Unfortunate situation for the best friend. If he was a best friend, he would understand; as the train comes careering his way, that no parent could ever condemn their child to die.
6. Take the cash and tell nobody, not even my family. Bury it somewhere secret and dig it up from time to time when the need arises.
5. I would not be keen for the boy to be the only guest at the sleepover. Unless gay, there is no way that *** will not be on his mind… I have, after all, been a 14 year old boy myself. I would keep the peace with my daughter, and tell her to invite two more of her female friends to stay the night as well, in the lounge room… all of them. Oh, and I would have a little chat with the boy and intimidate the absolute bejesus out of him.
4. Give the pill to the other guy. I would rather die than live alone on a desert island with a corpse as company.
3. Convict the accused robber and get my daughter back. Once my daughter is returned safely, pardon the convicted and set Robocop onto the pricks who hurt my daughter.
2. Another easy one. Save the boy… children come first, always. If my uncle is not terribly injured I would hurry the kid to hospital, then send help to my uncle.
1. Slow down enough for the pedestrian to get across the road. Plowing onto the pedestrian will not only kill him, but damage my car and make it easier for the people chasing me to catch and kill me.
Sophie's Choice: There is no easy answer here… offer my own life for the safe release of them both. Failing that, talk to the kids and explain the situation to them… then draw straws.
The little girl was about 3 – you can't explain that sort of situation to a kid that age. Even if you could, it seems even crueller than letting her die.
Re: Sophie's Choice – in an impossible situation I can see why she chose the way she did. She was being pragmatic – the little girl had almost no chance of survival in the camp whereas her son (about 10 I think) may have been able to make it through.
Number four, I think you have the right idea, but then you've got to wonder if it's selfish to wish the same situation on the other guy. I'm always trying to go for the altruistic option, and I feel like taking the pill puts all the guilt on me. Does that make sense?
Oh, and Sophie's choice, that is probably the best solution, but assuming you're a decent enough parent, you'd still be driven mad by the agony of having had to choose.
Nah, just love the remaining child TWICE as much.
=P
Actually, I just gave this some thought and for Sophie’s Choice I would say, as sincerely as I could, “Shoot them both. You would be doing them a favour.” then turn my back and walk them away slowly and calmly. It is also the only response he won’t count on and won’t be expecting… if I’m lucky he would be amused at the ludicrous suggestion and that would give me value as a future plaything. Let’s face it, he has probably asked this question to a few people by now and I doubt anyone would think this way… it would intrigue him enough to put him off balance and maybe shift focus from killing anyone, because now he has a toy that is worth screwing with. If he lets us go then that night I would kill all three of us after explaining the situation as best as I could to my children. If he shot them both then he really has done them a favour… so… he is quite unlikely to choose this option as he wants to cause maximum suffering. I tell you this right now though, I would rather my children be dead than offer a sick minded b*s*a*d like that even a moment of pleasure.
It isn’t like both children dying could make me feel worse than one dying.
Then again, to even be in this situati0n I would have to be Jewish, right?
However, I have the gift of contemplation right now… attacking the guard would be pointless as I would be beaten before I even raised a fist. I like to think that on instinct I would drop to my knees, embrace my children and let him do whatever he is going to do… accepting the future with humility and honour as best as I could. He already knows what he is likely to do before he even asks the question and I have no illusions of escaping the scenario anyway.
Every single one of these situations, I could make my decision instantly. The one about the money is stupid. Of course you're going to steal it, if you and your family are starving to death and you know the money will help for me it's a no brainer.
Man this is a really bad list. It is just bad hypothetical situations. Nothing here actually worth even thinking about.
The real Dilemma
You see a young boy in the river drowning. You are about to save him when someone yells out, will you save my boy Adolf. Yes you are in Austria and the lady doing the screaming is in fact Mrs Hitler. Do you continue to save the boy or do you let him drown?
How is this a dilemma? It's happening 40 years before anyone would know who Hitler is, or will be.
Unless you're a time traveller, you don't know about Adolf's future at that time, so you would save him.
And since you know that Hitler became a dictator, you also know that he won't drown as a kid, even if you don't save him.
Supposing I travelled back in time to this moment, I would NOT save Hitler, boy or not. He became such a monster I would much rather save 6 million Jews than a little boy who is going to be a mass murderer.
OK. But let me ask you this, then: don't you think someone else (Goebbels, Himmler, Göring) couldn't have taken Hitler's place and become a similar monster, if Hitler had been killed as a kid?
I love this list. The bonus item has hints of nazi in it. The dilemas can best be solved by following some simple rules. a)self preserve. b)family second. c)friends. d)if family only, better let all of them go.
i can tell you what you have to create 3rd possibility and use it that`s the way i do
???
Well in any given situation, there are three options – the right one, the wrong one and the Brock one, which is basically the wrong one but with worse spelling.
Many options: right, wrong, left and gone…
This list really sums up the theory that most people never look outside of the box…if you want to find new options for ANY situation you'll always find one…besides…in reality…many factors determine your actions.
10. Increase buoyancy of lifeboat and build makeshift rafts out of debris for some to float in. Also rower strength doesn't matter. Just sit and wait to be found (unless you can see land in which case swim). Rowing will put you further from where rescuers will look. Personally I'd grab something buoyant and float by the boat.
9. Contact/request Palliative Care Team to keep pain controlled top priority, even above survivability of the patient.
8. Disappointed that I'm a slave to an idiot who can't make a profit off of slave labor.
7. Call Superman. If that fails I'd pull the lever half way, resulting in a derailed train killing many on board, but stopping it to save my son or my friend.
6. Find out what kind of person the one who lost it is. If they are generally good and cannot support themselves without it, return it, otherwise keep it.
5. Not difficult at all. Not allowed. She will be *****ed, but all 14 year olds are *****ed at their parents for something anyway, so no big surprise there.
4. I assume it's whatever is considered the normal curative dose of a medicine. In that case split it. Both would get some benefits and might survive. But, if you somehow knew it was the exact amount that would save only one person, congratulations you are psychic. Take it and then use your psychic powers for good while wearing neon tights. Do this in the memory of your friend.
3. Good thing I'm not the jury. Ok, if I had to decide I'd create a trap, working with investigators to create a fake trial decision where I find the innocent man guilty in order to catch the extortionists sending them to jail. Then free the innocent one.
2. Patient Abandonment. You cannot leave, nor do you know that you will definitely save the kid; unless you are psychic (see no. 4). Instead contact dispatch and have them send another ambulance and hope for the best.
1. Blast horn and slow down so he can jump out of the way. If he just stands there while a car blasting it's horn and slowing down for him does not prompt him to hurry his ass, then he deserves a Darwin award.
Bonus: Beat the ***** out of the guard and hope you can take a monster down with you. You and both your kids are most likely going to die at some point in there anyway.
Actually, for number 7 it is a coal train, so nobody will die if you derail it. Yay!
I agree with most of these.
very weak list, quite a boring read
these are usually just simple choices made based on what is strategically the best. not sure how moraility comes into it but whatever
It wouldn't be really hard to choose, the first list was way better.
My answers:
10: Throw them overboard, it's not that hard to understand that they'll die anyways
9: it's more complicated than that
8: a. How is this a dilemma? It's not like I have to choose whether I'll be angry or not.
7: Save my child. I'd understand if I were my best friend.
6: Take the money. Whoever has a sack full of money, has to be rich anyways. It's probably from a bank or something.
5: Wouldn't let him. Easy.
4: Make placebo pills, so that none of us will know.
3: Tell the police.
2: Leave him. Stupid point though, how come I can't call backup?
1: Stop. If I hit him, even if I survive, I'll go to jail.
bonus: That's the harderst one. I'd choose my 14 year old daughter, who wanted to sleep with a guy.
I feel really sad that you would be willing to protect your daughter against some risk of underage *****uality, and yet you'd have no problem handing her over to a Nazi guard.
10. Throw some people and let the others live. It is better than all dying. Are you among the strong people on the boat?????
9. Take her to the hospital. If you can't, you actually have no right to take someone else's life even if they ask you for it.
8.Pleased because no one is benefiting from your cruel treatment. This one was quite obvious.
7. This one is quite hard. I suggest letting the friend die as he has saved your life once and he most probably will be pleased to save someone else's life, even if it means losing his own life in the process.
6. This one is just pure luck. The dilemma is not explained enough. You can keep the money and risk being caught or return it and risk starving from poverty. You could take some money from the bag and return the rest but you still risk getting caught. But how will you know that the owner is a generous person? If he is, then he will give you some money as the reward for your honesty.
5. You can let the guy come over but as long as you say your daughter not to lock the door and that you are fully allowed to come and check on them from time to time. That I think is the best answer to this dilemma.
4. I suggest sharing it 50/50 as the healthier person will at least get better. You can also compete for it in a race, the winner gets the medicine as he is probably healthier and has a greater chance of survival.
3. Make the conviction, as the police will have already known the situation. Even if they didn't, your daughter will be released and you can release the convict as you have been blackmailed.
2.Get to the boy. Your uncle is healthier and has a greater chance of survival while the boy does not. You can also call for help while you are on your way to the boy or comeback for your uncle AFTER you have saved the boy. Both are human and have equal rights.
1. Stop the car and duck your head. Let the guy pass. Honk from afar to make the pedestrian wary of the situation. The gunman probably wont be able to hit you during that time because he would have to brake too. After the pedestrian has passed, continue your escape.
+ Start fighting with the guard so you will all probably die. That way, you wouldn't have had to choose between any of your children and your decision was fair ans square.
Sorry for my bad English.
I think you actually have some of the most reasonable answers I've heard in the comments section.
Thanks.
Cool…I don't have to put Sophie's Choice in my netflix list now.
I think some people didnt understand the bonus. Its about choosing one kid or neither. You cant say you'll fight the guard or say you'll go with the kids. The guard isnt trying to fill in the places in the gas chamber to optimise the use of gas he ebing concerned about global warming and stuff). He just wants to mess with your mind.
Im not a dad or anything but id have to say id probably give up both kids. Lets face it, guilt will always catch up and you will either commit suicide or you will start thinking constantly about the dead child, ignoring the one that lived. And im not sure the kid that lived will be happy when he/she asks where the other one is and you say you had to decide their execution to let the him/her live.
Plus you only know that this kid will live till the next time. You arent sure he will make it.
@Arsnl, who wrote: "You cant say you'll fight the guard…He just wants to mess with your mind."
That is precisely why you can fight the guard. It doesn't matter whether you will win or not. You can choose to fight the guard.
Good comment – and I agree. A pitty the content filter asterisks 'sewer-side' as a problematic word, that's just dumb.
That's just the thing. No matter what choice you make, the guilt is the same. You're lying to yourself if you think you'd feel less guilty for not saving one of your two kids when you had the chance.
I enjoyed the list – but to me there is a difference between a choice to do something and you have a wee bit of time to make that decision or to decide your plan of action in a split second which could have dire consequences. ( Only my pennies worth )
RIDICULOUS!!
10 – Overcrowded lifeboat. Offer to go overboard, as you explain why, trying to inspire others to follow — then JUST DO IT. Whatever others choose is not your responsibility. DO NOT bother playing God, with heroic, meddling efforts at triage, deciding who must live and who must die. NO DILEMMA.
9 – Jack your spouse up on the best HEROIN, the best of all drugs if you're not concerned about the long term effects, and keep her happily addicted in a blissful wonderland to the very end. No pain, and one happy and oblivious ending. It is not a question of whether she will die, but only how, and with what Quality of Experience. NO DILEMMA.
8 – Slaves Dream – A dilemma based on how to FEEL about something? Really? SERIOUSLY? That slave is going to be exploited. Period. Drying up demands for slave goods WILL DO NOTHING to stop slave exploitation. SILLY PSEUDO-DILEMMA
7 – Debt to Friend – Ignore all so-called "owe-my-life-debts" (which I don't accept) and make a choice based on a different rationale. DIFFERENT DILEMMA
6 – Found Money – Presumes that the rightful owner can be determined with certainty (otherwise, no dilemma). REGARDLESS, a large sum found in a poverty stricken area where your own family is starving = feed your family. This is not a dilemma, because NOT "stealing" enough to feed your family (e.g., Jean Val Jean's loaf of bread in Les Miserables) may be tantamount to killing. Furthermore, if you are engaged in the process of finding the owner, there are wages to be considered (.e.g, don't muzzle the ox that treads out the corn). Found money, at the least means Found Job. Your family eats while look for the owner.
There, the only dilemma is in stealing that which is someone else's only means of survival. Then you are killing them to save your own – in which case, go on and hang yourself as the worthless predatory pig that you are – you are nothing new in the animal kingdom.
5 – Daughter's Sleepover – For me, no dilemma. Asked another way: If my bestest, closest friend in the world (whose life I once save, honest) really loved me, and didn't want to hurt my feelings, would he mind terribly if I spent the night with his wife, since I am friends with her too? I promise nothing will happen. Are parents really this daft, this parentally retarded, this so-called "morally conflicted"? Yes, sadly, they are. Poor mush-brains, the lot of them.
4 – Choice for Cure – Don't be a coward. Sneak the friggin antibiotic into your friend somehow and take your chances. You might heal anyway, or you might die a noble death. NO DILEMMA, as you are going to die eventually anyway. Like your friend and everyone else. Worst case, split the antibiotic and both of you take your chances that a half dose might be enough. If not, one or both of you die happy, knowing you tried.
3 – Judge's Abducted Daughter – Why is this #3, it's positively stupid. So, now you won't set a man free, whom you KNOW is innocent, on what — PRINCIPLE?!! Just do the right thing in all cases, which includes freeing yourself of all your ridicuolously debilitating sensibilities. Sheesh, that one was dumb. NO DILEMMA.
2- Paramedic's Uncle — more inane than #3. Stop to help someone who likely going to survive anyway, and ignore the one who likely won't — because he is RELATED TO YOU? Again, are people that stupid? Maybe. Tsk. News Flash: YOU ARE RELATED TO ALL HUMAN BEINGS. NO DILEMMA.
1 – Again, dumb. Kill someone by running them over because a bullet from behind MIGHT hit you?! REALLY?! NO DILEMMA, preserve whatever life you can, whether or not it's your own.
Sophie's Choice – That was the hardest one. If forced, I might have chosen my son, and not my daughter. Why? I don't know, because I would tend to think of my son as I think of myself, and in that case I would want to be chosen rather than have my sister taken.
Another, preferable, choice – fight them all, regardless of means, and let them kill us all. Whatever. Dilemma Solved, go out with a bang, screw them and their choices, just stand on a much higher principle, on behalf of your entire family. Let the turds inherit the Earth, as they always have tended to thus far.
I like your responses:
9. Great answer, wish I'd thought of that. Shame I don't know any smack dealers.
6. A no-brainer for me. I would definitely take the cash and feed my family. I would bury it somewhere and would never tell anyone about it, just dip into from time to time on market day. Love the allusion to Val-Jean.
2. Agreed. The dumbest "dilemma" of them all. Of course you would save the kid; even if the other person in need was not your uncle, you would be obliged to save those in the most peril first… as well as the fact that the uncle has already lived a long life and the boy is just starting out. Inane scenario.
1. Again, I concur unswervingly. Why run down an innocent person, in the hope that you don't get shot from behind? Surely you would damage/crash your vehicle after hitting the pedestrian anyway, thus ensuring that two people die..?
I really don’t think you have given these enough thought, especially #9. Where would you find the heroin? And even if you did, as heroin is an *****, wouldn’t you be arrested just like if you helped your wife die?
suicide
#7 I'd call the Flash to save them both. Why not? Nothing else in the situation is realistic in any way.
Number 5 should be obvious. No *****ing way is some little bastard gonna sleep over with my 14 year old daughter. never gonna happen. hell would freeze over first.
also this list was pretty terrible.
Why are some words being censored? I really hope that Listverse, one of the best sites the internets has to offer, isnt adopting censorship…
You'd REALLY call your daughter's friend a bastard, when the scenario makes it quite plain he's done nothing at all to harm her?
second worst list ever
Yes! Another moral dilemma list. I love these things
Hi, this is a superb list to think about – and I love the way the comments are heading right now – so I won't run a massive reply this time, I just love to join in… so…
10: I'd have the strongest swimmers holding on to the sides of the boat all the way around it, since the likelyhood of us being able to row to freedom may be remote. The lightest folks, e.g. women and children, would be inside the boat because they are lighter I could fit more onboard. If there were two life boats, I'd set one of them on fire as the smoke would be the best distress signal to passing ships (assuming the main boat has already sunk).
9: I'd mix up a batch of green potato stew since this is a natural food poison and therefore untraceable.
8: A.
7: I'd save the Son, only because I would never hear the end of the family abuse otherwise. Plus, the friend has had a life, the son has yet to have one.
6: B – money ownership is questionable seeing as nobody really 'owns' something which gets handed about from person to person on a daily basis. We just hand money on to the next person. With that in mind I'd actually do a George Bailey act and hand the money out to all the towns folk.
5: I have him sleep in another room.
4: I'd share the medicine out between us to prolongue our lives long enough for a mutual rescue. If no rescue arrives before the medicine runs out then we'd both likely die; as by this time the chances of any rescue at all are becoming so remote that even a 'cured' surviver would be starving and hopeless.
3: Is that a typo? If I convict the robber they'll set the girl free? Surely not. In any case, I'd take the note to the police to report the blackmail. Then I'd get another judge to take over the case.
2: If he's well enough to survive (in your opinion) then I'd leave him in favour of the boy; who's condition is unknown. I would then radio in the uncles emergency while driving.
1: I'd take my foot off the gas while honking the horn like crazy, allowing the padestrian to jump the hell out of the way. If I used the brakes then both of us may be shot.
Bonus: We'd all three likely die in that place – and we'd all know it. If there was a question of giving my life to save the kids then fine. Otherwise I'd ask the boy what he would do. He is unlikely to say 'take the girl', and is more likely to volunteer himself. He would then go to his death thinking himself brave and honourable to save his family; and the mother would respect and honour her sons wishes.
Had fun doing that, thanks!!
" I'd mix up a batch of green potato stew since this is a natural food poison and therefore untraceable."
I bet your cooking isnt that great either. Shamans arent world renowed chefs.
But for the bonus: i think its unfair to ask your kid to make such a decision. The premise is about children and they dont know gentleman's code. Plus, what if he says he wants to stay. Neah dude. Bad decision.
@ Arsnl – yeah, I'm a terrible chef – good guess.
As to your second point, well, I guess it depends on how old this 'child' is, since there's no age specified in the list item. Anything above 12 would be reasonable to ask the kid, but less than that age and the guy would probably just cry and be very confused. Thanks for your comment.
If I was a slave, I’d try to kill the people who captured me. I wouldn’t care if no one was buying a rug. I’d seriously spend every day trying to plan how to kill the most people.
Don't you think slaves did that? Trying to escape or to kill their masters? They did, but most of them failed. And were promptly punished or executed.
How is the daughter's sleep-over a moral dilemma? It's not a case like if the boy doesn't stay the night the daughter dies, but you don't believe it's "right" and goes against your morals.
If you say "NO" then it's "NO". If you don't want a boy over overnight, then tell her "NO" and don't worry about "being unfair to her". Kids always want to do things you don't want them to do and you don't need to worry about being "fair" to them. I think this is a case of "I don't want my kids mad at me". I don't care if times have changed-if you don't want a boy to spend the night then say "NO". It's ok to use that word.
Sophie's Choice was a fictional novel. It wasn't a true story.
But it's a "JFrater Fact" as written, so it will be left in without change or comment, just like the candy cane on the Christmas list.
@17 u are right what a boring list;Hope to read a more interesting one than todays !
wow that story at the end really moved me.
1, Throw the others overboard
2, Help her die
3, B
4, Save my son
5, Keep the money
6, He aint stopping!
7, I'd take the tablet
8, Gaol the innocent man
9, A
10, B
+ Kill the guard