Would You Save a Baby From a Burning Building?

[infinite dreams]

For me it would likely be a function of instinct + adrenaline. If I heard a crying baby inside the building and (especially if) people were just standing around outside with their proverbial fingers up their asses, I would be compelled to act.

 

[Jet]

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

I could never be certain. There are other people let them be heroic.

 

[Jet]

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.....

Your interpretation of the OP is way to literal man.

It's like saying Watership Down was obviously about bunnies.

 

[Eventhorizon]

Your interpretation of the OP is way to literal man.

It's like saying Watership Down was obviously about bunnies.

It wasn't!!!!???? And ...way to date yourself. I have not heard that movie mentioned for 20 years at least.

 

[Jet]

It wasn't!!!!???? And ...way to date yourself. I have not heard that movie mentioned for 20 years at least.

There is a movie? Is it any good? I've only ever read the book.

 

[acd]

For me it would likely be a function of instinct + adrenaline. If I heard a crying baby inside the building and (especially if) people were just standing around outside with their proverbial fingers up their asses, I would be compelled to act.

I agree for me as well... Instinct+adrenaline plus instantly imagining I *may* have been able to do something and didn't... But @Jet brings up a great point... So now I'm second guessing. I might be able to live with myself after if I didn't act knowing I'm here for my own child.

 

[Happy Phantom]

It wasn't!!!!???? And ...way to date yourself. I have not heard that movie mentioned for 20 years at least.

There is a movie? Is it any good? I've only ever read the book.

Wait, so people don't read the books before seeing the screen versions?

#readingisfundamental

 

[t56hg2bv]

"Stop it! Now look: no one is to stone anyone until I blow this whistle, do you understand? Even - and I want to make this absolutely clear - even if they do say "Jehovah"."

 

[the]

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.....

A very intj response.

 

[t56hg2bv]

Who here would say, "No I would not?"

In your defense, sacrificing ones life for a baby that has no present significance in your life is a bit masochistic.

It would be VERY difficult not to consider the impact it would have on my children's lives by not doing a quick evaluation to ascertain the possible outcomes.

With that said, I'm really good at multi tasking so I would be actively looking for options to save that child while also remembering my own children.

The question is not a fair question. Its almost impossible to know what one would do until they were actually in that situation. To not suggest you would be sacrificial seems heartless but to be sacrificial also seems masochistic and even more heartless if you have people who need you for their survival.

It's easy to judge a person by their response to such a question. Obviously, nobody wants to deny help to a defensless child who can't help their self - it's a tragedy.

I say, do everything you can. Recognize you're not a fireman, that the firemen would in fact tell you not to enter the building. But still make an effort.

Personally, I would risk being burned. I would probably take more risk then a reasonable person. I mean what kind of father would I be if the example I set is to turn a blind eye to a baby about to die. It would be hard to look my children in the eyes with any conviction if I didn't try in every way I could.

 

[t56hg2bv]

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.....

Not so unlike MBTI tests is it. Many of the questions could go either way but after many questions you start to get a feel for the direction you lean towards.

It's hard to give an exact answer because it's a very fluid question yet asking for a yes or no.

I think the idea is to explore the possibilities within you and come to your own set of moral and ethical conclusions.

I don't however believe it is fair to judge someone on a hypothetical situation.

 

[Happy Phantom]

It's hard to give an exact answer because it's a very fluid question yet asking for a yes or no.

It is a fluid question yet I don't see the yes or no in the question, as it's up to the individual to think it through

I think the idea is to explore the possibilities within you and come to your own set of moral and ethical conclusions.

This.

 

[Jet]

mean what kind of father would I be if the example I set is to turn a blind eye to a baby about to die. It would be hard to look my children in the eyes with any conviction if I didn't try in every way I could.

This is an odd view to me but understandable. We (in America and other "western" countries to some extent) are very self centered. Your answer is fully based on your feelings, your need to satisfy some view that you have of yourself.

Our children don't care what motivates us to be a parent. In fact it's probable that even if you do everything right your children will still look down on you or hate you because they are self centered and can't see the big picture.

Imo, It is far greater a thing to sacrifice your personal code to be there for your children than it is to be the reckless hero.

 

[dang]

This is an odd view to me but understandable. We (in America and other "western" countries to some extent) are very self centered. Your answer is fully based on your feelings, your need to satisfy some view that you have of yourself.

Our children don't care what motivates us to be a parent. In fact it's probable that even if you do everything right your children will still look down on you or hate you because they are self centered and can't see the big picture.

Imo, It is far greater a thing to sacrifice your personal code to be there for your children than it is to be the reckless hero.

She Hulk would save the baby.

 

[dang]

I would at least try to save the babe.

Shouldn't saving a baby be pretty easy for a milk toast bandit? I mean you got the skillz already.

 

[dang]

I would only try to save the baby if I could then adopt him and name him Carlos.

 

[dang]

This was a trick question. The baby is actually a demon baby. So if you try to save it you live, but if you don't you die. You fools. Hahahahahaha!

 

[Love_Conquers_All]

I would save the baby and keep it as my own. Anyone who leaves a baby in a burning building does not deserve to be a parent.

 

[t56hg2bv]

This is an odd view to me but understandable. We (in America and other "western" countries to some extent) are very self centered. Your answer is fully based on your feelings, your need to satisfy some view that you have of yourself.

Our children don't care what motivates us to be a parent. In fact it's probable that even if you do everything right your children will still look down on you or hate you because they are self centered and can't see the big picture.

Imo, It is far greater a thing to sacrifice your personal code to be there for your children than it is to be the reckless hero.

It wasn't about them seeing our motivation to be parents, it was them seeing the value of life and courage. If you set an example that you don't care for others (as a parent) then the child will see that as the normal behavior. If the parent is seen as some kind of coward then the child will lose respect for them as a person. Children learn by example, not just words.

It was not about my needs or feeling. What possibly could I gain from running my ass into a burning building other than personal harm to myself.

Granted, that part of the post was really secondary, to actually helping a baby that was in need.

That's what I was saying.

 

[Ryso89]

Would you save a building from a burning baby?

The baby would have to be stomped out, of course.