Would You Save a Baby From a Burning Building?

Would You Save a Baby From a Burning Building?

  • Fuck yeah!!

    Votes: 11 61.1%

  • Yes, as long as I knew we would both make it out of the building reasonable unharmed.

    Votes: 2 11.1%

  • Umm...

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • Hell no!! Survival of the fittest bitches!

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • No, unless I was certain I absolutely would not die.

    Votes: 2 11.1%

  • Idgaf

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • If it was baby H, yes.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • If it was baby H, no.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • If it was baby Donald Trump yass!!

    Votes: 2 11.1%

  • If it was baby Donald Trump no fucking way. Burn you little orange mofo!

    Votes: 6 33.3%
  • Total voters
    18
If I could without getting killed YES!! If I didn't have people who I love dearly and some who depend on me HELL YES!! If you are able to and flat out do nothing, then you need help.
#eugene #hero
mjZAFK1.gif
 
Last edited:
...If I didn't have a chance to think about it. Yes.
 
too many factors to consider. so much Ni-ing :p
 
I'd like to think I would, as we all would, I'm sure. House fires are my biggest fear, so I realy don't know. It would depend on how bad the fire is. If it's really bad or out of control, what would the point be? You could rush in there to be a hero with very little chance of actually making it out.
 
Most people like to think that they would, but I'm willing to bet most people...

Would.

At least if they were the only person available. No matter how modest you are people overestimate their own chances of survival as well as instinctively try to protect others, especially those that aren't able to protect themselves, like a baby, so unless you have an actual phobia of fire you'd likely brave the fire. Also if you've already escaped the fire yourself, you're going to feel more confident.

The biggest factor stopping by far is the bystander effect. If anyone else is around you're likely to wait to see if someone else is willing to save the baby.
 
The fact everyone is overlooking the obvious is maddening.
The question poses two outcomes. You either save the baby or you do not. It's "would you." There's no suggestion of trying or failiing only "would you."
So either you do save the baby or you ignore the baby and let it die. In this scenario who would honestly let the baby die.
Make the question more interesting like, "A baby is crying and you have a 50 % chance of either saving the baby and yourself or a 50% chance of attempting to save the baby and dying with it in the process." Would you try.....
 
Jet said:
Nope.

I got my own babies to worry bout.

#sorrynotsorry
Click to expand...
I'm not buying it. Your badass self would save the baby if you were certain you would exit the building unharmed.

Eventhorizon said:
The fact everyone is overlooking the obvious is maddening.
The question poses two outcomes. You either save the baby or you do not. It's "would you." There's no suggestion of trying or failiing only "would you."
So either you do save the baby or you ignore the baby and let it die. In this scenario who would honestly let the baby die.
Make the question more interesting like, "A baby is crying and you have a 50 % chance of either saving the baby and yourself or a 50% chance of attempting to save the baby and dying with it in the process." Would you try.....
Click to expand...
Let me help you understand. There are too many scenarios to list and you are the person standing in front of the building. Open your mind and explore all of the possibilities, not just two. I created a nonsensical poll in hopes that many of you would get that. Use your thinking and intuition skills people!
#justsaynotobinary
 
Last edited:
No, unless it was my baby. Then yes I'd die trying to save my baby.

A small child age 3-4 and up that is crying for help I would probably risk my life to save the kiddo. Babies don't have that same effect on me that small children do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top