• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Ruin an expensive suit to save a drowning child?

Would you ruin an expensive suit to save a drowning child?

  • Yes

    Votes: 210 90.5%

  • No

    Votes: 22 9.5%
  • Total voters
    232
James Bond has gotten many expensive suits (not to mention expensive cars, houses, boats, hotel rooms, historical pieces of architecture) destroyed for the sake of good. I would do the same.
 
I'd save him

BUT>>>>>

what if the kid is ugly?

or the suit was made of gold, studded with diamonds?
 
So, if you voted yes, to be logically consistent you would also have to support our war (AKA we cannot stand by while a dictator kills his own people*) among many other uncomfortable stances
Click to expand...
People feel more inclined to act when the issue is directly in front of them, and feel it easier to ignore the farther away it is. Because they feel as though it is not under there control, unless its in arms reach, this attempts to validate there inconsistency in logic.
 
WTF kind of question is this? Of course id never ruin a perfectly good suit.

No really, I have a niece and she is the most precious thing to me on this earth and if I ever lost her I would be lost in life so the way I think of it is that child is someones [Grand]son/[Grand]daughter/niece/nephew/brother/sister, I couldnt bare to think of how someone would feel to lose a loved one. So of course id save the child, if it meant the child were going to die id throw my whole friggin wardrobe in the water.
 
what the hell is wrong with people why are they worrying how much the suit costs, am i the only one there, you would be saving somebodies life how could you even contemplate the answer surely you were programmed with better morals than this?
 
shock horror! said:
what the hell is wrong with people why are they worrying how much the suit costs, am i the only one there, you would be saving somebodies life how could you even contemplate the answer surely you were programmed with better morals than this?
Click to expand...

I don't understand either. Some people are responding as though this were posted in the lounge.

It seems that a lot of people don't believe in the golden rule. I wonder if some of these same people get pissed off when people do shitty things to them?
 
It seems that a lot of people don't believe in the golden rule. I wonder if some of these same people get pissed off when people do shitty things to them?[/QUOTE]

People have no morals in this world anymore, therefor, I believe in Anton LeVey's golden rule, "due unto others as they have done unto you".

Although I am not a good swimmer, fuck yea, I would ruin a good suit, new hair due, expensive shoes & so on to save a drowning child or adult. No one in their right mind would even think about the thought of ruining a materialistic item on their person to save that child.
 
I would pretty much save the child no matter what the circumstances. I really don't think the price of my outfit would even cross my mind if I saw a child drowning.
 
I know this is an old thread, but I was searching for something else and came across it.

What I think the more interesting question is why would someone bother posting a question/poll when they very well know what everyone is going to say? And, for the sake of argument, let's say the obvious answer of the OP being a troll is not it.

I don't think anyone would post a question like this and truly expect a lot of "i'd save the suit" responses. And even if a few people did, the "crowd reaction" is completely predictable and uninteresting: oh what a selfish ass, etc.

So why did the OP bother? Was he desperate to post something vaguely controversial because he wanted to start a thread that would get replies? I honestly can't think of any other answer, other than the OP is slightly retarded and actually thinks this would result in stimulating and original debate.
 
eon_blue said:
I voted yes, I agree with qwe about the sociopaths.
Click to expand...

qwe said:
anyone who votes no and means it is a sociopath...
Click to expand...

you make sociopaths sound like monsters...

sociopaths do have have feelings and would most likely save that child because they are still logical beings and very capable of comprehending the value of human life.

i myself might even be one and i voted yes. im not sure though, i mean, imo i fit the criteria but my psychologist said that since i was snooping around for info about it and approaching a psych about it, that kinda disqualifies me lol. prolly just me being a hypochondriac and deluding myself into neurosis(??? = its the condition that a neurotic person has right?)
 
I would ruin a million dollar suit to kill a crooked politician or corrupt political leader or a racist cop.
 
Lost Ego said:
you make sociopaths sound like monsters...

sociopaths do have have feelings and would most likely save that child because they are still logical beings and very capable of comprehending the value of human life.

i myself might even be one and i voted yes. im not sure though, i mean, imo i fit the criteria but my psychologist said that since i was snooping around for info about it and approaching a psych about it, that kinda disqualifies me lol. prolly just me being a hypochondriac and deluding myself into neurosis(??? = its the condition that a neurotic person has right?)
Click to expand...
do you experience empathy?
 
it's slightly disturbing there are 19 people that would choose the suit over the child. :\ if you owned an "expensive" suit, one would think you earned enough money to afford a new one.

clearly, i would save the child.
 
It's rather lame that this thread has 133 replies. There are so many better hypothetical philosophical questions that could be posed:

Q: Would you give up all the money you own to save one random 5 year-old bot from being killed while his parents watch helplessly?

Q: Either your closest friend is killed or 1000 random people around the world are killed. You don't know any of these people and they aren't friends of friends either. (This question can be tweaked to make it more or less dramatic by replacing 1000 with a smaller or larger number. You could also find people's thresholds by finding the lowest number for which they will allow their best friends to die.

And so on. There's a book called "The book or horrible questions" that has a lot of similar questions, though they tend to be rather twisted and perverse. The book also has anonymous survey results so you can see what kind of demented answers people gave.
 
Fjones feel free to start a thread on one of those other topics. :)

Even if the child were terminally ill and might only live less than an hour after being saved I'd not be worried about the suit over the child's life.
 
is there really no-one else in the vicinity wearing attire more suited to swimming?? Of course ruin the suit, its easily replaced and probably worth alot less than the guilt you would carry with you, having watched a person drown to spare an inanimate suit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top