[NT] Cut the rope? NT only

[avolkiteshvara]

I'll play even though helicopter blades have an RMP 100,000 and is OBVIOUSLY more than ample force to lift 5 people and the tensilary stregth of the modern rope ladder can OBVIOUSLY hold 5 people.

If I had time to think of it, rationalize it, acccept it, I suppose I would cut the rope.

In reality I would either pull someone off or just stay there because I wouldn't think it was fair that others got to be rescued.

 

[jenocyde]

It just seems obvious to me. What else would be the point of the question?

Further investigation is good. Pointing out the various holes in thisguy's scenario is unhelpful and pointless.

I don't make assumptions as to anyone's point.

My questioning is to see if there is any other solution (not to poke holes), since I would prefer that no one has to die. Anyway, Jennifer already summed it up best.

Either way, what difference does it make to you how we answer the question? Just answer it the way you feel is best and move on...

 

[entropie]

Well, I'm gonna die anyway.

So it's a matter of whether I want some company in the interim, or if I want to be noble and allow others to survive.

I'll be noble. And lonely

Hahaha that would give the statement "I am gonna die anyway, present company excluded" a completly new meaning

 

[Oberon]

Since the whole scenario is imaginary, I just imagine a second helicopter.

 

[Totenkindly]

... that wasnt the goal of the question, which was obviously meant to question our value systems.

It was?
Did you write the OP?
How do you know this?

In any case, as I specifically said earlier in this thread, my answer will not give a clear indication of my value system as it is stated -- that was one of my original issues.

Also... what does this have to do with "conventional" values? Basically, my "values" might look like "values" but they're pretty reasoned... "Let's see: I'm hanging on a rope, it only holds four, I'm the last one, it makes sense for the most people to live, hence I let go." Change the situation -- I am #4 on the rope -- and I'd be telling the guy BELOW me to let go.

It says nothing about what I think of HIM/HER as a person, nothing about what I think about life. It's a reasoned decision, and the value of my own particular life or another particular life is not really something I am taking into accord. I calculate the dynamics of the problem, then do what I think "makes sense" regardless of my "values." It's less a "sacrifice" and more an "efficient solution to the problem, proving best-end results."

And since all these details IMPACT what I see as the "most probable BEST end result that maximizes life for everyone involved," the details matter in terms of deciding what happens. The truth is CALCULATED in real-time, based on the situation specifics, not imposed over it by a prior valueset.

Does that answer the values question?

Since the whole scenario is imaginary, I just imagine a second helicopter.

I'd imagine myself sitting at home in front of the TV in bunny slippers and drinking an espresso.

 

[garbage]

Why'd the chopper leave at all? If you said that the capacity of the helicopter could only hold four people, that'd make sense. But you said the rope couldn't hold more than four. Which implies that if someone else climbed up, you could safely get all five into the helicopter before it leaves.

magic helicopter



Also, the mountain is magic, too.

 

[Night]

So:
Do I allow unavoidable personal death disfigure my present respect for life?

Can't really say.

I don't know. I hope I would make the 'right' choice.


(I'm not sure what system of value this scenario serves to highlight; in all likelihood, the prospect of inevitable death would overwhelm reasonable thought and simply cascade the individual into a state of hysterical self-preservation. Nothing is really clarified by our answers. Only that, as distant theory, we may/may not recognize the value of life.)

 

[Fluffywolf]

This question is not practical, flawed, and I refuse to asnwer unless the question is properly rephrased to actually make sense.

If for some odd reason I knew for sure the rope was gonna break anyway. I would cut the rope.

But if this would happen real life I doubt I would know that and hang on instead.

 

[Typology]

What if you couldn't cut through the rope in those sub-zero temperatures? What then?

 

[Fluffywolf]

I know, I know Typology!

You let go of the rope and stick them in your pants to warm them up first.

 

[avolkiteshvara]

I'm not opposed to these types of philosophical questions.

But it is basically asking:

would you do someting logical/moral and sacrifice yourself?

or

would you be a narcassitic asshole and let everyone die with you?

Who is going to say the latter.

There needs to be more realistic, competitive options.

 

[Night]

NTs only please. there is one like this in your section too

To clarify -

I presume it was your intent to wed value systems with type.

Did the responses mimic what you anticipated?


I'd be interested to hear a summary of your results, once they are satisfactory. Further, if you believe that a retooling of your scenario would have enhanced your comparison of response:type.

 

[Jaguar]

The question is bullshit. Period.

 

[Fluffywolf]

This would be a better question:

You find yourself on a ropeladder hanging from a chopper together with 3 other people. Two people are higher up the ladder, one is slightly down from your position.

Your eyes catch the rope slowly tearing up near the helicopter. You quickly asses the situation and realise there is approximatly 1 to 2 people too much hanging from the rope. But you are not certain. You have 4 seconds of descision time before the ladder breaks and everyone falls. Cutting beneath you first in the case there are two people too much hanging from the rope would sufficiently strain the rope to break anyway, due to the time it takes to cut the rope.

Will you cut the rope above you, or beneath you?



The angles that make this question interesting is. Can you live with yourself taking the chance to cut one person to their death in the case one was enough. Are you willing to put two more lives at stake for the sake of an assumption. Would you cut the rope above you just so you don't have to live with killing someone else. Etc, etc.

 

[substitute]

I'm not. Honestly... I have a lot of trouble answering theoretical questions that don't make sense. I don't see them as honest questions, so there is little point in committing to something that involves my moral and rational character. I might as well say, "I wait until we're halfway up, then shake the ladder madly to knock off my friends like limp raisins so that I might survive."

My other rationale here: I see this question has been cross-posted in all the other MBTI archetype forums. Maybe my response is a more NT response -- do NTs typically meta-explore the question rather than just answering it like some other archetypes might?

Too right. I had the exact same thoughts as you.

edit - mind you, I'd probably cut it (supposing I'm playing along with this daft question), cos I'd figure I could probably find a way to survive anyway. I'm good at that And since the pilot sucks and my friends apparently also suck, I'd probably have more chance of surviving without them!

 

[Nocapszy]

stay on: big ego.

but more seriously, i can't stand heroes, and the idea of being a hero is even more sickening.
people do heroic things to make themselves feel better about themselves -- about how virtuous they are. it's actually hypocritical.

i'm not virtuous and i know it.
i'm the pure one.

 

[Domino]

I'd cut the rope because me and Tom Cruise can fly.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Nah, only you can start flying. Tom is already flying.

 

[Domino]

hahahaha, and shame on me, I'm in the wrong thread. *flies away*

 

[laughingebony]

Before I read the responses, I thought NTs would have the least trouble with thought experiments, but that is obviously not the case.

It's really not that complicated. Sure, the question has some loopholes, but you know what the hypotheses should be. Answer the question accordingly.

I'd cut the rope. Either I die or all of us (including me) die.