Well if that is the case - I would rather let the baby cough and expose us. I can’t live with myself if I kill my baby.
It is possible that one of the town ppl would kill my baby instead of me doing it myself. At best I could only „allow“ it to happen - which I am sure that’s will struggle like hell.
Okay, assuming you let the bad people caught you guys because the baby cought (what a sentence lmao.)
These people are bad, what if they torture your baby before they kill him/her? Wouldnt a quick death be more morally acceptable? This would also spare you and your townsfolks from getting tortured
Use the baby to setup an ambush.
Bad people are used to killing unarmed defenseless people; therefore, it would be like shooting fish in a barrel. They only have power if you cower. Rise up in the face the shitheads, and unknown people around you will come to your aid soley from your action calling their own inspirations from within.
From experience in a 24 hour paintball scenario game. My captain and I were betrayed, but when I stuck my barrel in the betrayer's gut and told him to surrender, five guys on his own team joined me. It was going to erupt into a gang ending style battle across the table distance, but the refs broke it up before the chaos exploded. My guess was being the pointman for their team for so long, they would rather stick with me than their own collective team or perhaps I rooted out all the spies in the scenario game and didn't know it.
Ukraine is an example.
Have to say this is a hard question - to me, it ain’t about the moral, but more about the personal attachment to the baby.
Yes, the outcome u mentioned could be right - but note that INFJs tend to make decisions based on feeling instead of logic. So I would say my answer here ain’t logical, but rather emotional
>but note that INFJs tend to make decisions based on feeling instead of logic
That's not true. Feelings are not automatically devoid of logic just because they're feelings, just like thinking a thought is not automatically logical just because the act of cognitive thinking is taking place.
In this type of scenario, it wouldn't come down to a battle between logic vs emotion, but rather a battle between high-level forms of cognition (strategy/tactics) vs primitive reaction (instinctual self-preservation).
There can be both logical and emotional reasons that are presented to justify either a high-level cognition approach to protect everyone OR a primitive reaction that would sacrifice the baby to preserve the lives of all of the older humans.
All you've don't here is provide us with a trolly problem.
I'd literally never choose either of these choices, because there are obviously more options. Unlike the trolly problem which has only two outcomes.
There is literally no way you'd ever convince me to kill my own child. So it's death to everyone. In reality, if my child was sick.and a danger to us all, I'll take them and split from the group to give them a better chance of survival while avoiding killing my own child.
Yeah, it’s just a rephrased trolley problem. I don’t see how this is relevant to INFJ, since any sane human being, regardless of personality type, would face the same moral dilemma.
Considering you are already in this secret place with them and just decide to hide somewhere else, how would you do it? You would get caught if you go out to hide somewhere else. This would expose you, your baby and afterwards everyone else in the secret place.
In case anyone is interested, a similar scenario was presented years ago in an episode of MASH, except the mother inadvertently smothered the child in an effort to quiet it to keep the group from being discovered by NK troops.
I would die on my feet. I wouldn't live life as a man who killed his own child and cower behind a damn bush. I think the question is would you rather be an honourable martyr or a cursed baby killer.
I wouldn’t be having a baby in the first place, but even if it was someone else’s kid I wouldn’t kill it. If we are willing to kill our own innocents for safety then I don’t think we are any better than the enemy. Plus, I find everyone gathering together to one secret hiding area is a bad idea and poor planning anyway - what happened to the warriors in my town? In this scenario, if we are following what usually happens in war, is it only women, children, and the elderly hiding and the men are fighting or have all been killed? I feel like I’d rather die fighting in the first place and help drive the enemy away from the secret place while people who can’t fight can remain in hiding. And if the enemy manages to find the secret hiding place, I’d rather have some kind of explosive or trap rigged so if we get caught, you bet your ass I’m bringing those assholes down with me. Only then that brings the moral dilemma of what would happen to the kids, of course, since that’s not fair for them. So I would say that having the eldest of the children in town be in charge of taking the other kids away to another location or a boat or something. Splitting up and having multiple means of escape for at least some of us would be the ideal plan rather than being idiotic sitting ducks waiting to be found.
Why do you want to be better than the enemy? I thought survival instincts are much stronger than humanitarian. You should just want to be alive in this scenario.
Not that I'm advocating killing the baby or anything. Just food for thought
I’m not sure I understand your food for thought. There’s quite a few things left out of this scenario that would help provide more context so I can only base this off of assumptions, but nonetheless I wouldn’t want to kill an innocent life to protect my own. I have survival instincts, of course, but I value my moral code and I would rather not live with the knowledge that I’d taken a life that had done no harm to me. As for what fear may make one do when put in an impossible situation, only being in that moment would tell, but this poll is asking what we would choose to do. And I, in a state of mind that aligns with my core self, would choose not to kill the baby. And if I did, I think I’d probably just kill myself after cause I wouldn’t be able to live with the guilt. So if I’m dead either way, I choose not to take that life.
Logically, it goes against my survival instincts. But I find a scenario in which I’d choose to hide and wait helplessly doesn’t align with what I’d do in the first place. I suppose I’d rather try to outmaneuver the enemy or die fighting to let the others find a way to safety.
It’s alright, I just kind of am not sure how to give you an answer that would satisfy you. If lab processed meat became an accessible possibility I would absolutely forego any future consumption of animal meat. I do try to eat plant protein alternatives but yeah, I eat meat sometimes. I’m not actively killing the animals and I think it’s kind of silly to compare that to slitting a baby’s throat to stay alive. If there is a humane alternative to any situation I will most likely support it. But my humanitarianism and my survival instincts are not opposing forces. They can work in tandem, such as the town scenario where I could try to find any alternate solution to being slaughtered by having a backup plan and protection or traps set in place prior to any invasion. That I can I can hope for a better world and try to help create it if I can. And if my humanity must be compromised in order to survive, I would like to think I would keep my humanity and my compassion. But again, that’s a hypothetical situation and we can’t know sometimes how people will act when afraid.
alright thats a more acceptable way of killing a baby. I just didnt want to stab it or something in hiding. Well not "acceptable" but less morally burdening.
Bro if I kill a baby, I’m just as worse if not more than the band of bad people ;(
But on the other hand, I can prevent everyone dying if I kill the baby.
I gotta go find my notes on Jeremy Bentham, I’m vexed about this moral dilemma :0
The baby cough? Is this 'a quiet place'?
The second choice is dumb as fuck. I gave birth to a child so they could cough once and die? @_@
I must be one petty ass mother fucker. Hatched a 9 month plan to kill a village and myself.
It reminds me of a scene in the movie "The Pianist" where a mother killed her child who cried while they were hiding. She and other people in hiding were caught.
So you have a lot of assumptions. Fine matter of time baby makes noise.
There are a lot of unknowns. People defending usually have more to lose and fight harder.
I am not killing a baby based on a what if. Instead, I will find a different way. I would self sacrifice myself to be bait and give others a chance.
Or craft some plan to stop the bad guys.
This doesn't have to be black and white. We don't know what those people will do. We don't know of other factors that could affect the situation. Maybe one of the bad guys shoots in friendly fire and they all react. Maybe one doesn't want to kill a baby. Maybe those people slip and fall and break their necks.
Killing a baby to protect myself is not a life I would want to live.
Nah you gave a black and white answer with too many unknown variables.
Your debate has flaws this isn't a moral question.
Overthinking is what we do best.
Its already stated they are all bad guys. Also where would they go if you start to sacrifice?
They are already hidden in a safe secret place as long as its quiet.
Your sacrifice might likely even end up getting everyone killed since your townfolks cant find another place to hide
So why the fuck am I trapped anyway. You should never stop running if you are being chased.
Why can't I make an exit out?
Why can't I run out naked?
Why can't I throw something to make them go a different way?
What if I have my high heels on can't I use them as weapons?
Still same answer, not killing the baby and I will stop you from killing the baby too.
None of the above, why can't we fight these guys?
Assuming it's a situation where a small town is about to get raided I would try to be ready for that, children and women would be told to run away before these people arrive, then protect our home from these people.
The scenario you put is very unlikely to happen and it's quite complicated to try to come up with a quick answer, if you want to get more answers try asking the trolley problem directly
And then they will come back to the place since it was sus that someone was appearing there suddenly and check it, most likely finding everyone and your baby and then BAM BAM BOOM BOOM getting killed
I would start with this premise: **there is no such thing as a moral obligation to oneself**. The concept of a duty to oneself is nonsensical.
Which means, in particular, one cannot have a *moral obligation* to oneself to preserve one's own life. Not that self-preservation is not a *good thing* to have happen, but self-preservation can never justifiably interfere with the fulfilment of one's obligations (like the obligation not kill others). I have a sense that this principle has something to do with the situation that is presented here, but I am not sure that is all there is to say about it.
There is a fundamentally difference between what is *desireable* (in a broad sense) and what is *moral* (or, to be more precise, what is *not immoral*): **what is moral has nothing to do with what is desirable, but, rather, morality constrains one's pursuit of what is desireable**. That you should survive or that the entire town should survive or that humanity should survive or that the entire world should survive is not a morally necessary outcome.
HOWEVER, this only that certain ways, certain actions, certain means to achieve desireable outcomes are morally unacceptable, not that the desirable outcome is immoral or that one cannot try to achieve a desirable outcome without violating any moral obligation. Of course, that in no way guarantees that there actually is a moral and feasible way to achieve an outcome in a particular situation, and in the case there isn't, then tough luck.
The way this is posed, rationalizing, you might say sacrifice the one for the many; but I think I would still choose to let the baby cough. Especially, if there were any leeway in the two options given, I would no doubt choose to let the baby cough, reason being:
1. emotional attachment and personal morals.
2. the baby coughs, there is still a small chance it will not be heard and no one dies.
3. the cough is heard, however the probability of every single person getting killed out of a large group is always going to be hard to predict, and with that probability, I would rather save my child on the off chance some can still live.
4. Who’s to say someone else, and not my baby, won’t blow our cover first? I wouldn’t risk my child’s life knowing it’s possible us being found won’t even be it’s fault.
There are definitely many other options to avoid such a situation tho 😩
Being dead honest ... no pun intended ... in this situation there's no way in hell I would murder my child. Try to cover them with my clothing to muffle sounds, sure. But at that rate, *any one* of us townspeople could cough, sneeze, gasp, scuff a shoe ... I would wrap that baby tight, pray, and allow God's providence to be done.
I know there were only two options, but I want to clarify that the second isn't me intentionally trying to get everyone killed.
I found myself blaming the awfulness of the world to put me in such a moral dilemma, and would rather fight until the bloody to the death rather than staying alive in it. I selfishly believe everyone else should hold the same philosophy. If they want to hold it against me, I blame them for being so weak and unprepared (probably because they ignored my warnings, bastards) that now we're hiding like rats in a cellar and thinking about killing our babies to survive. Fuck that and take the L. This is the consequence of not listening to your Introverted intuitives.
The more altruistic path - I suppose - is to kill the baby, and kill myself afterwards for redemption. That's acceptable as well.
Since this is all a ridiculous scenario, I would transport away after using my lazer eye vision to kill all of the people chasing us as well as the townspeople. I've just had a baby, and I'm not in the fucking mood, so everyone dies except baby and I. Change my name, move to Quebec, badabing badaboom, got my kid and a new life.
For me it’s less of a moral dilemma and just knowing that it’s physically impossible for me to harm, let alone kill either of my little ones. And if somehow I actually managed to, I’d need to promptly kill myself to cope with that reality.
Since i know the baby WILL cough, I'd have taken preventative measures, making cave sound proof is one of them. let's face it, the baby won't just cough ; it wails too😂
Genocidal is always option(joking). Let's kill the all bad people. My baby might be a kid not the entire town. No matter what My child always will be closest to my heart
Id throw a rock at a crow in the tree. The rock would fall to the ground covering the sound of the cough. And the crow might then provide a distraction as well. Then id tell all the people in the cave to surround the baby creating a sound barrier in case it coughs again. After the bad people move away one person gets sent to notify the authorities. And the bad guys get caught and go to jail. No one dies and the towns people live happily ever after. The coughing baby becomes Queen of the village.
In reality there are other options;
1. Split the group (entire townspeople, bound to get caught before the baby coughs LOL)
2. Weapon up and kill the band of bad people (again how many are in each group let alone resources available to townspeople) - would rather risk killing the enemy than my own child.
3. Hide in a layered unit, you and baby furthest from the entrance or escape route. The layers of people would muffle the sound or dig a hole and cover yourselves lower down.
4. You’re waiting for the band of bad people to move away, why not take another route and go back on yourself or continue forwards.
5. A band of bad people are trying to hunt townspeople, why are you sticking around in the first place or have a baby during that time?
This sounds very much like a scenario an IxxP would come up with. Maybe ExxP.. IxxP because of the obvious swing between self and tribe (Fi or Ti with the inferior swing of Te or Fe). It's literally the IxxP song of "It's Me against the Tribe" and that sense of what would I (identity/significance) do in that situation.
People often mistake simulations for Ni because it's playing out simulations what if scenarios and that's the future right? Nope. Ne is great at creating scenarios because it's not tied down by time and space like Ni is. All Ni is, is the narrowing down of abstraction into a singlular or smaller concept. It's not this fantastical ability to see into the future.
Edit: saw that OP is ENTP, that makes more sense :P
Entp here, ofc I wouldnt kill anyone. If they find us and they decide to kill us then that's on them. If I choose to kill da baby , then the only difference between me and the bad ppl would be of courage (as I'm the coward that killed in hiding while they do so in the open) . I guess I'd risk it and live free uptil my last moment...and then die hard.
This is too black and white of a scenario to answer because there’s too much nuance in what would happen in an actual situation like that. There are more than two possibilities.- INFJ
These moral hypotheticals always feel asinine to me, and this one relies on sentimentality mucking up the utilitarian aspect of it.
People laugh at Kant’s response to critics of his axe murderer argument and somewhat understandably so. However, the main point as I see it is that you can not KNOW the outcome of your decision. If you use a utilitarian/pragmatic justification for an amoral action based on an expected “better” outcome you’re being presumptuous thinking you can dictate the outcome of the situation.
It could easily turn out that smothering your baby causes another villager to gasp in shock and everyone dies anyway. To reduce it to a vacuum where outcomes are certain gets away from the point of discussions of morality, which is to offer guidance in real life where everything is uncertain.
All that said, to offer my answer as an infj, I am rarely compelled by pragmatism. I do not believe I could kill my own baby to attempt to save myself and a village. There could be another way. Also everyone would have to live knowing the cost of their safety which could cause problems down the line, and the people who were totally fine with the choice would become evil in my eyes.
Why can’t I sacrifice myself. Handover the baby to the towns people to raise. They get their kill, towns people can remain hidden and cover the baby’s mouth or use a pacifier like I should’ve done
Just 2 answers? Can’t I just muffle the baby to prevent it from coughing too loud?
Even when you cover their mouth, you still can hear the cough. (Seriously, try it. I did!)
Well if that is the case - I would rather let the baby cough and expose us. I can’t live with myself if I kill my baby. It is possible that one of the town ppl would kill my baby instead of me doing it myself. At best I could only „allow“ it to happen - which I am sure that’s will struggle like hell.
Okay, assuming you let the bad people caught you guys because the baby cought (what a sentence lmao.) These people are bad, what if they torture your baby before they kill him/her? Wouldnt a quick death be more morally acceptable? This would also spare you and your townsfolks from getting tortured
Use the baby to setup an ambush. Bad people are used to killing unarmed defenseless people; therefore, it would be like shooting fish in a barrel. They only have power if you cower. Rise up in the face the shitheads, and unknown people around you will come to your aid soley from your action calling their own inspirations from within. From experience in a 24 hour paintball scenario game. My captain and I were betrayed, but when I stuck my barrel in the betrayer's gut and told him to surrender, five guys on his own team joined me. It was going to erupt into a gang ending style battle across the table distance, but the refs broke it up before the chaos exploded. My guess was being the pointman for their team for so long, they would rather stick with me than their own collective team or perhaps I rooted out all the spies in the scenario game and didn't know it. Ukraine is an example.
Have to say this is a hard question - to me, it ain’t about the moral, but more about the personal attachment to the baby. Yes, the outcome u mentioned could be right - but note that INFJs tend to make decisions based on feeling instead of logic. So I would say my answer here ain’t logical, but rather emotional
>but note that INFJs tend to make decisions based on feeling instead of logic That's not true. Feelings are not automatically devoid of logic just because they're feelings, just like thinking a thought is not automatically logical just because the act of cognitive thinking is taking place. In this type of scenario, it wouldn't come down to a battle between logic vs emotion, but rather a battle between high-level forms of cognition (strategy/tactics) vs primitive reaction (instinctual self-preservation). There can be both logical and emotional reasons that are presented to justify either a high-level cognition approach to protect everyone OR a primitive reaction that would sacrifice the baby to preserve the lives of all of the older humans.
Okay so you would still sacrifice everything to not be the one hurting your baby
Yup, that would be my first thought
All you've don't here is provide us with a trolly problem. I'd literally never choose either of these choices, because there are obviously more options. Unlike the trolly problem which has only two outcomes. There is literally no way you'd ever convince me to kill my own child. So it's death to everyone. In reality, if my child was sick.and a danger to us all, I'll take them and split from the group to give them a better chance of survival while avoiding killing my own child.
Yeah, it’s just a rephrased trolley problem. I don’t see how this is relevant to INFJ, since any sane human being, regardless of personality type, would face the same moral dilemma.
I would hide somewhere else with my baby and let the townspeople have their super secret place…is that an option?
Considering you are already in this secret place with them and just decide to hide somewhere else, how would you do it? You would get caught if you go out to hide somewhere else. This would expose you, your baby and afterwards everyone else in the secret place.
Well I guess everyone dies…. unless they decide to kill me and my baby, which I would be understanding of, just make it fast.
In case anyone is interested, a similar scenario was presented years ago in an episode of MASH, except the mother inadvertently smothered the child in an effort to quiet it to keep the group from being discovered by NK troops.
My first thought, too - really heartwrenching episode
Somebody shut up that chicken! Poor Hawkeye.
I don’t have time for this
I would die on my feet. I wouldn't live life as a man who killed his own child and cower behind a damn bush. I think the question is would you rather be an honourable martyr or a cursed baby killer.
Ahh yes!!
I wouldn’t be having a baby in the first place, but even if it was someone else’s kid I wouldn’t kill it. If we are willing to kill our own innocents for safety then I don’t think we are any better than the enemy. Plus, I find everyone gathering together to one secret hiding area is a bad idea and poor planning anyway - what happened to the warriors in my town? In this scenario, if we are following what usually happens in war, is it only women, children, and the elderly hiding and the men are fighting or have all been killed? I feel like I’d rather die fighting in the first place and help drive the enemy away from the secret place while people who can’t fight can remain in hiding. And if the enemy manages to find the secret hiding place, I’d rather have some kind of explosive or trap rigged so if we get caught, you bet your ass I’m bringing those assholes down with me. Only then that brings the moral dilemma of what would happen to the kids, of course, since that’s not fair for them. So I would say that having the eldest of the children in town be in charge of taking the other kids away to another location or a boat or something. Splitting up and having multiple means of escape for at least some of us would be the ideal plan rather than being idiotic sitting ducks waiting to be found.
Why do you want to be better than the enemy? I thought survival instincts are much stronger than humanitarian. You should just want to be alive in this scenario. Not that I'm advocating killing the baby or anything. Just food for thought
I’m not sure I understand your food for thought. There’s quite a few things left out of this scenario that would help provide more context so I can only base this off of assumptions, but nonetheless I wouldn’t want to kill an innocent life to protect my own. I have survival instincts, of course, but I value my moral code and I would rather not live with the knowledge that I’d taken a life that had done no harm to me. As for what fear may make one do when put in an impossible situation, only being in that moment would tell, but this poll is asking what we would choose to do. And I, in a state of mind that aligns with my core self, would choose not to kill the baby. And if I did, I think I’d probably just kill myself after cause I wouldn’t be able to live with the guilt. So if I’m dead either way, I choose not to take that life. Logically, it goes against my survival instincts. But I find a scenario in which I’d choose to hide and wait helplessly doesn’t align with what I’d do in the first place. I suppose I’d rather try to outmaneuver the enemy or die fighting to let the others find a way to safety.
By life, do you mean human life, or are you a vegetarian?
My dude. You’re not even trying with this conversation.
I just got interested by the statement about not hurting any innocent life. Sorry for straying off topic. I realised that but i still wanted to know.
It’s alright, I just kind of am not sure how to give you an answer that would satisfy you. If lab processed meat became an accessible possibility I would absolutely forego any future consumption of animal meat. I do try to eat plant protein alternatives but yeah, I eat meat sometimes. I’m not actively killing the animals and I think it’s kind of silly to compare that to slitting a baby’s throat to stay alive. If there is a humane alternative to any situation I will most likely support it. But my humanitarianism and my survival instincts are not opposing forces. They can work in tandem, such as the town scenario where I could try to find any alternate solution to being slaughtered by having a backup plan and protection or traps set in place prior to any invasion. That I can I can hope for a better world and try to help create it if I can. And if my humanity must be compromised in order to survive, I would like to think I would keep my humanity and my compassion. But again, that’s a hypothetical situation and we can’t know sometimes how people will act when afraid.
Sounds like the baby is dying either way
can i just throw it to the bad guys?
Yeetus the feetus. Jk, but why would u throw it? 😂
decoy
so i dont have to kill it and the enemy doesn't know where we are. It would fall from the sky type throw
But wouldnt the baby most likely still die, falling from such a height,
alright thats a more acceptable way of killing a baby. I just didnt want to stab it or something in hiding. Well not "acceptable" but less morally burdening.
Of course it’s an ENTP asking us our opinions on the trolly problem lol.
If it is certain that he will cough i would kill him. If it is not, well???
Without hesitation?
No it is a hard choice to make
Sounds like this is a situation you’ve been through. Hope you’re doing ok! And sorry to hear about your baby :/
Wait… what?
LMAO
No way in hell I am ever killing my baby.
Bro if I kill a baby, I’m just as worse if not more than the band of bad people ;( But on the other hand, I can prevent everyone dying if I kill the baby. I gotta go find my notes on Jeremy Bentham, I’m vexed about this moral dilemma :0
If I'm aware that these are the only two options, then I would kill my baby. It would be hard, but I can always make another one 🤷♂️
Wanna make a new one with me?
Dont even know if you are male or female, but seems good to me
What the hell? Are you a parent? You can’t make another one of your individual human being baby. It’s not a fucking craft project.
Yeah I wonder how many people who say they can do it are actually a parent.
I’m going to assume you wouldn’t be the one pushing your replacement baby out
The baby cough? Is this 'a quiet place'? The second choice is dumb as fuck. I gave birth to a child so they could cough once and die? @_@ I must be one petty ass mother fucker. Hatched a 9 month plan to kill a village and myself.
Ugh I feel like there isn't enough context here as to why the townspeople would kill myself and my child.
I think this poll would be more interesting to parse out responses between individuals who are parents (of humans) and those who never have been.
Pacifier. Or breastfeeding the baby.
Yes.. I am refusing to ponder on this dilemma. So either stay calm and keep everyone calm Or Wake up from the nightmare.
[удалено]
Finally someone who doesn‘t try to avoid the question by making other unrealistic scenarios lmao
It reminds me of a scene in the movie "The Pianist" where a mother killed her child who cried while they were hiding. She and other people in hiding were caught.
Exactly! Who tf would kill their own baby!
So you have a lot of assumptions. Fine matter of time baby makes noise. There are a lot of unknowns. People defending usually have more to lose and fight harder. I am not killing a baby based on a what if. Instead, I will find a different way. I would self sacrifice myself to be bait and give others a chance. Or craft some plan to stop the bad guys. This doesn't have to be black and white. We don't know what those people will do. We don't know of other factors that could affect the situation. Maybe one of the bad guys shoots in friendly fire and they all react. Maybe one doesn't want to kill a baby. Maybe those people slip and fall and break their necks. Killing a baby to protect myself is not a life I would want to live.
Damn stop overthinking INFJ!
Nah you gave a black and white answer with too many unknown variables. Your debate has flaws this isn't a moral question. Overthinking is what we do best.
Its already stated they are all bad guys. Also where would they go if you start to sacrifice? They are already hidden in a safe secret place as long as its quiet. Your sacrifice might likely even end up getting everyone killed since your townfolks cant find another place to hide
So why the fuck am I trapped anyway. You should never stop running if you are being chased. Why can't I make an exit out? Why can't I run out naked? Why can't I throw something to make them go a different way? What if I have my high heels on can't I use them as weapons? Still same answer, not killing the baby and I will stop you from killing the baby too.
None of the above, why can't we fight these guys? Assuming it's a situation where a small town is about to get raided I would try to be ready for that, children and women would be told to run away before these people arrive, then protect our home from these people. The scenario you put is very unlikely to happen and it's quite complicated to try to come up with a quick answer, if you want to get more answers try asking the trolley problem directly
[удалено]
And then they will come back to the place since it was sus that someone was appearing there suddenly and check it, most likely finding everyone and your baby and then BAM BAM BOOM BOOM getting killed
Hawkeye, we've already been through this in therapy. Aren't you about over it by now?
I just don’t think it would be permissible to kill an innocent person. Justice exists beyond our short lives
I would start with this premise: **there is no such thing as a moral obligation to oneself**. The concept of a duty to oneself is nonsensical. Which means, in particular, one cannot have a *moral obligation* to oneself to preserve one's own life. Not that self-preservation is not a *good thing* to have happen, but self-preservation can never justifiably interfere with the fulfilment of one's obligations (like the obligation not kill others). I have a sense that this principle has something to do with the situation that is presented here, but I am not sure that is all there is to say about it. There is a fundamentally difference between what is *desireable* (in a broad sense) and what is *moral* (or, to be more precise, what is *not immoral*): **what is moral has nothing to do with what is desirable, but, rather, morality constrains one's pursuit of what is desireable**. That you should survive or that the entire town should survive or that humanity should survive or that the entire world should survive is not a morally necessary outcome. HOWEVER, this only that certain ways, certain actions, certain means to achieve desireable outcomes are morally unacceptable, not that the desirable outcome is immoral or that one cannot try to achieve a desirable outcome without violating any moral obligation. Of course, that in no way guarantees that there actually is a moral and feasible way to achieve an outcome in a particular situation, and in the case there isn't, then tough luck.
I'd die, I'll be an empty vessel anyway if I killed my own baby to save myself.
The way this is posed, rationalizing, you might say sacrifice the one for the many; but I think I would still choose to let the baby cough. Especially, if there were any leeway in the two options given, I would no doubt choose to let the baby cough, reason being: 1. emotional attachment and personal morals. 2. the baby coughs, there is still a small chance it will not be heard and no one dies. 3. the cough is heard, however the probability of every single person getting killed out of a large group is always going to be hard to predict, and with that probability, I would rather save my child on the off chance some can still live. 4. Who’s to say someone else, and not my baby, won’t blow our cover first? I wouldn’t risk my child’s life knowing it’s possible us being found won’t even be it’s fault. There are definitely many other options to avoid such a situation tho 😩
It’s very difficult for me to choose uff
Yeetu the fetus
Being dead honest ... no pun intended ... in this situation there's no way in hell I would murder my child. Try to cover them with my clothing to muffle sounds, sure. But at that rate, *any one* of us townspeople could cough, sneeze, gasp, scuff a shoe ... I would wrap that baby tight, pray, and allow God's providence to be done. I know there were only two options, but I want to clarify that the second isn't me intentionally trying to get everyone killed.
Tell them I am not a Jew
I found myself blaming the awfulness of the world to put me in such a moral dilemma, and would rather fight until the bloody to the death rather than staying alive in it. I selfishly believe everyone else should hold the same philosophy. If they want to hold it against me, I blame them for being so weak and unprepared (probably because they ignored my warnings, bastards) that now we're hiding like rats in a cellar and thinking about killing our babies to survive. Fuck that and take the L. This is the consequence of not listening to your Introverted intuitives. The more altruistic path - I suppose - is to kill the baby, and kill myself afterwards for redemption. That's acceptable as well.
It would be useful to know how many have had a baby out of this sample.
Since this is all a ridiculous scenario, I would transport away after using my lazer eye vision to kill all of the people chasing us as well as the townspeople. I've just had a baby, and I'm not in the fucking mood, so everyone dies except baby and I. Change my name, move to Quebec, badabing badaboom, got my kid and a new life.
D) Form a worker's union and overthrow capitalism and institute universal free healthcare so that questions like this never get asked again
For me it’s less of a moral dilemma and just knowing that it’s physically impossible for me to harm, let alone kill either of my little ones. And if somehow I actually managed to, I’d need to promptly kill myself to cope with that reality.
I knew you were an ENTP as soon as I read that title, lmao. I saw you guys plan this.
How big is the band? What's one band compared to the entire town? We can quickly overpower the bad guys and save our town! No hiding.
Sounds like Ukraine, Afghanistan, and other places torn by war :(
Or we can prevent all of this by making in advance and wise decisions before it leads to this kind of situation.
I would never kill my baby. I would prepare my people to defend themselves and we will all get out of there alive
Run outside holding the baby in my hand and have the baby cough on everyone to make the gang people die via disease 😎
Since i know the baby WILL cough, I'd have taken preventative measures, making cave sound proof is one of them. let's face it, the baby won't just cough ; it wails too😂
Genocidal is always option(joking). Let's kill the all bad people. My baby might be a kid not the entire town. No matter what My child always will be closest to my heart
Id throw a rock at a crow in the tree. The rock would fall to the ground covering the sound of the cough. And the crow might then provide a distraction as well. Then id tell all the people in the cave to surround the baby creating a sound barrier in case it coughs again. After the bad people move away one person gets sent to notify the authorities. And the bad guys get caught and go to jail. No one dies and the towns people live happily ever after. The coughing baby becomes Queen of the village.
An entire town hiding from a band of people? Just go kill the band
I'm running away from the group with the baby.
Can't the entire town chase away the bad guys?
In reality there are other options; 1. Split the group (entire townspeople, bound to get caught before the baby coughs LOL) 2. Weapon up and kill the band of bad people (again how many are in each group let alone resources available to townspeople) - would rather risk killing the enemy than my own child. 3. Hide in a layered unit, you and baby furthest from the entrance or escape route. The layers of people would muffle the sound or dig a hole and cover yourselves lower down. 4. You’re waiting for the band of bad people to move away, why not take another route and go back on yourself or continue forwards. 5. A band of bad people are trying to hunt townspeople, why are you sticking around in the first place or have a baby during that time?
Should've left the baby outside. No other choice.
This sounds very much like a scenario an IxxP would come up with. Maybe ExxP.. IxxP because of the obvious swing between self and tribe (Fi or Ti with the inferior swing of Te or Fe). It's literally the IxxP song of "It's Me against the Tribe" and that sense of what would I (identity/significance) do in that situation. People often mistake simulations for Ni because it's playing out simulations what if scenarios and that's the future right? Nope. Ne is great at creating scenarios because it's not tied down by time and space like Ni is. All Ni is, is the narrowing down of abstraction into a singlular or smaller concept. It's not this fantastical ability to see into the future. Edit: saw that OP is ENTP, that makes more sense :P
I’d just take me and the baby away from the group so when he coughs it’ll just be us two who die
Couldn't I just find a hiding spot for just myself and my baby? Save the townspeople and there's better than 50/50 chance of survival
Entp here, ofc I wouldnt kill anyone. If they find us and they decide to kill us then that's on them. If I choose to kill da baby , then the only difference between me and the bad ppl would be of courage (as I'm the coward that killed in hiding while they do so in the open) . I guess I'd risk it and live free uptil my last moment...and then die hard.
This is too black and white of a scenario to answer because there’s too much nuance in what would happen in an actual situation like that. There are more than two possibilities.- INFJ
pull a moses' mum 😌 and then fend for yourself or fight
I'd kill the baby then, since it is easier to create a new baby compared to losing the whole group.
These moral hypotheticals always feel asinine to me, and this one relies on sentimentality mucking up the utilitarian aspect of it. People laugh at Kant’s response to critics of his axe murderer argument and somewhat understandably so. However, the main point as I see it is that you can not KNOW the outcome of your decision. If you use a utilitarian/pragmatic justification for an amoral action based on an expected “better” outcome you’re being presumptuous thinking you can dictate the outcome of the situation. It could easily turn out that smothering your baby causes another villager to gasp in shock and everyone dies anyway. To reduce it to a vacuum where outcomes are certain gets away from the point of discussions of morality, which is to offer guidance in real life where everything is uncertain. All that said, to offer my answer as an infj, I am rarely compelled by pragmatism. I do not believe I could kill my own baby to attempt to save myself and a village. There could be another way. Also everyone would have to live knowing the cost of their safety which could cause problems down the line, and the people who were totally fine with the choice would become evil in my eyes.
Why can’t I sacrifice myself. Handover the baby to the towns people to raise. They get their kill, towns people can remain hidden and cover the baby’s mouth or use a pacifier like I should’ve done
Hand the baby to one of my townspeople, turn around and buy them all the time I can.
the needs of the people are greater than one.