It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could you Leave Your Child behind to Save the Other 2?

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

I stay with all. Final answer. All three. I brought them into this world, I will go out with all three. Together. I will not throw one away.




posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

Well you will have to be very precise in writing the scenario.





Nope you save the 2 you can then probubally die trying to save the last. But then the 2 still survive..... Hehe


Oh I wasn't precise enough with what I wrote. In that one you would have to jump out with them for it to work.

The follow up question is would you throw the two free and go die with the third or keep the family together to die.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: queenofsheba

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Actually any answer that was unable to pick one of the two choices would have failed anyone if this was poised in a class.


I thought the OP was pretty clear that there was only two choices. That however is also part of the test in scenarios like this to see if people can clearly understand the problem they face.

I thought about how to construct a scenario like this where people were clear about the choice.

This is what I came up with.

Your in the car with your three kids driving down a winding road in the mountains. Your tire explodes sending the car out of control where half the car is hanging off the cliff teetering.

You can reach two of the children and escape, but any and all attempts to reach the third results in the car sliding further off he edge if you do nothing and wait for help it will be certain death with all four of you going over the cliff as the car is slowly sliding further over the edge.

Do you grab the two you can reach and escape or wait patiently to die with them.


Maybe that scenario which is really the same as the OPs will help people make a decision.


Nope, still sounds like the same nightmare with the same outcome. Guilt, pain, trauma and survivor's guilt. I guess it's one of those things you need to actually experience to know how you would react. Some people freeze, some jump into action and come out all heroic. I myself have fortunately not been put in that situation. Nor would I want to be. If I were, maybe the adrenaline and survival instincts would kick in and take over where my emotions froze. Hard to say.


So I take it that as in the other scenario you would all die together? BTW it is the same scenario I just rewrote the situation so that people wouldn't go outside of the poised question. (I just took away options because so many couldn't understand the exercise).

OK so you have given the same answer twice. Now same scenario except you could save two of your children by throwing them free but you will go down with the car and other child.

Do you save the two or have them stay with you till the end?


Well played! I like the additional question!



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: queenofsheba
a reply to: Grimpachi

I stay with all. Final answer. All three. I brought them into this world, I will go out with all three. Together. I will not throw one away.



Maybe I wasn't clear.

So if you had a chance to save two of your children knowing you would die with the third you wouldn't save them instead they must die with you?



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: queenofsheba
a reply to: Grimpachi

I stay with all. Final answer. All three. I brought them into this world, I will go out with all three. Together. I will not throw one away.



Maybe I wasn't clear.

So if you had a chance to save two of your children knowing you would die with the third you wouldn't save them instead they must die with you?



I really think you just hit the nail on the head. The common thread is that people don't want there child to die alone/ don't want the guilt of surviving.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

Just running off with two of the kids is still no guarantee that anybody will survive the volcano exploding!

Its about principles ... not outcomes!



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:45 PM
link   
Man just reading this question makes me sick to my stomach. Obviously the no brainer answer is to take all 3 but in this scenario, as the OP explained, you can only take 2. I would not save 2 and leave 1 behind. I would stay with all 3 hugging them very tightly and assuring them that everything would be ok even though our demise is moments away. I'm a firm believer in the afterlife so why not start it all over again right away.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

People I think will generally self-sacrifice themselves for their children but can't imagine the survivors guilt or wouldn't endure the survivors guilt of losing a child.

That is why shebas reply puzzles me and I think I wasn't being clear about the question.

My cousin died saving his child from drowning his boy still died. I just can't imagine him purposely pulling his daughter down with him so they would all die together.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 09:48 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

I could carry all 3 but that's not the point to your thread. Ok here's a smart ass answer...I would take off my belt and tie the smallest one to me around my waist then pick up the other two and run.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE

You should have said a boulder pinned one where they couldn't get them free so either run with the two or all die together.


That would have stopped some of the answers. lol



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Different scenario. Your cousin died trying to save his child who was drowning. I'm from the Land of 10,0000 Lakes, MN...I grew up on a lake and knew how to swim, knew all the safety procedures, etc...like it was natural from a very early age, in fact I couldn't even tell you when I first learned, swimming was as natural as walking almost.

The first thing we are taught is how to save a drowning victim; but that's besides the point in this thread. The scenario posed to me on this thread was being on the brink of a volcano exploding and only having limited time to make a decision to react. Now me, on the other hand, I definitely could hold onto three children treading water calmly in a lake and survive. I got that...that is taught where I am from. Granted, perhaps a swollen river with currents and rapids is another story. You didn't exactly state the situation or context well enough for me to envision the circumstance. Where I am from, signing your kids up for swimming lessons is as natural as signing them up for preschool. Again, context is important.

Regards,
Sheba



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ArtemisE
Not to be a wise guy, but I believe the scenario is invalid, resulting in an impossible question to answer.

One would have to know that saving all three could not possibly happen.

In the state of mind at that instant, that knowledge with 100% certainty couldn't happen.
With any chance at all to save all three, the decision doesn't have to be made.

But I know the OPs premise is to just assume you know that with 100% certainty, not a big jump from very probably (like 99.99999% sure) can only save 2. I say can't happen, undefined, no answer possible.

The analogy is that it's like trying to divide 1 by a very, very small number... you can get an answer.
Now just assume you divide 1 by 0, a small jump from a very, very, small number... that's undefined, no answer possible.

Knowing 100% that you could only save 2 is not valid in real life, no matter how close to 100% sure you get an answer is possible, but 100% is undefined... no answer possible..

A invalid question with no answer...



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: DietJoke
a reply to: ArtemisE

Just running off with two of the kids is still no guarantee that anybody will survive the volcano exploding!

Its about principles ... not outcomes!


I would have to say its the opposite. I think the out come is far supirior to the principle.



posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofsheba

Not really? I am not sure you are really getting this. The story doesn't really matter no matter what the context is.


The question at bare bones is if you could only save two of your children would you in an impossible scenario where the third absolutely no matter what you do they will die.

For me this may not be every ones answer which it certainly hasn't been in this thread, but I would do everything in my power to save my kids I wouldn't make them die with me.

This isn't about skill or ability this is about a choice.

BTW a bit off topic but my cousin was in the running for Olympic swimming. But like I said it isn't about skill or ability it is a choice.

To me the answer you gave that you all die together would have been like my cousin purposely pulling down his daughter. I am pretty sure you wouldn't do that.

I would think you would want your kid to live on even if you couldn't. Am I wrong.
edit on 22-6-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 12:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArtemisE

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Rainbowresidue

That was my solution, too!
Star!!

Obviously the OP is not a mother.



Actually it's because I'm a father of an amazing 11 year old girl that I came up with this. I can imagine how insanely hard the decision would be. The question is, could you make that decision. You can't forget the other 2 die if you can't. So it's not an issue of self sacrifice...... All of us would give our life for our child's. It's if you would be strong enough to save 2 at the cost of one.



That doesnt make you strong. You would never do that to your child or have their last memories of you abandoning them , so you'd only be strong enough to do all you could for all to live and that their last memories of you was doing just that.

Its the only right thing to do.





edit on 23-6-2014 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-6-2014 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 01:01 AM
link   
I have 3 children, and there is no way i could leave one behind to save the other 2, i would rather us all go together, that may sound selfish because i know if i left one i could be sparing 2 of my childrens lives, but i couldnt live with myself after abandoning one of my children and leaving them to such a horrible death. In reality i would probably just run like crazy with all 3, the thought of leaving one behind to save the other 2 honestly probably wouldnt even cross my mind anyway. Man what a horrible situation that would be to have to decide that, its sad because people actually do have to make these decisions every day in some parts of the world it seems so cruel..



posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 01:37 AM
link   
It's an impossible choice.

Invalid, really. For me? There is only one choice. All three, or die trying.



posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 07:21 AM
link   
Read through all of the posts at this point and am amazed at the parents who would rather just die with all 3 children! As parents, you are in a leadership role. I have 3 daughters. I had made the choice to do whatever I can to assure my children live full lives and to the fullest. In such a dire situation...I would definitely save 2 of my children. Survivors guilt will not be an issue, since I will still have a lifetime of watching my other 2 children blossom and live full lives! Plus, logically, I would assume my family would go through a normal grieving process as any one does with a loved one dying. This in time passes and you continue on, with a renewed sense of the gift of living. Which child gets left behind??? All depends on the exact circumstances of endangerment and accessibility. Different scenarios, different results. It is insane and seems so callous to me at the thought of just sitting there to die with all of my children if I could save 2 of them! Why create such a tragedy of death for your surviving friends, family, and community? How more rewarding for everyone to celebrate lives saved? Naturally, I would want to save them all...but that is not an option in this scenario!

Edit add: I would hope that if someone else was with my children, they would save at least two of them! All children are precious even if they are not your own. I, also, would think that any parent would be quite happy if I saved 2 of their 3 children, instead of just sitting down with them so they don't die alone!?!
edit on 6 23 2014 by CynConcepts because: Correction and clarification



posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 07:31 AM
link   
a reply to: queenofsheba

If they are not triplets me and the larger sibling are grabbing the other two up and figuring out a way to attempt to overcome the situation at hand... Cannot say if we would make it or not but will try. How do you rationalize in a split second what child live or dies w/o trying every option 1 wonders.

It is a interesting question in a psyops kind of way. Who know what the answers say about those providing them, but that is mine.



posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 08:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ophiuchus 13
a reply to: queenofsheba

If they are not triplets me and the larger sibling are grabbing the other two up and figuring out a way to attempt to overcome the situation at hand... Cannot say if we would make it or not but will try. How do you rationalize in a split second what child live or dies w/o trying every option 1 wonders.

It is a interesting question in a psyops kind of way. Who know what the answers say about those providing them, but that is mine.



You do realize that it wasn't an option lol. The OP isn't " how can you carry 3 kids down a volcano". It's could you leave one child to die to save the other 2?


If you couldn't, just say I couldn't, and all your kids die.

I bet like 2/3rds of responders ignored the question and tried to figure out the best way to carry 3 kids.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join