Philosophy Sup Forums

You come across a drowning man. Do you save him? Should you be required to save him?

Attached: 1516231824764.gif (300x201, 4K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=PJyzqGiKtOo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

is he white?

I would. It would be heroic.

Apathy is death

Depends who is his.

I would save him but if he is drowning is a public place, if its private it would depend on who he is

it is a moral obligation to save him. so you should save him. but no one can blame you if you dont

If the cops legally don't have to, why should I?

I'd probably save them
required to? yes

Yes you should attempt to save him if it wont endanger your life because you would like him to save you if the situation was reversed. You should absolutely not be required to save someone.

you keep your eyes forward and pretend you didn't see anything, unless no one is around then you just watch and smile at him until he goes under.

Attached: 1520821335988.webm (640x640, 1.36M)

Sure if it doesn't endanger me or inconvenience me greatly and I can look forward to a high possibility of reward or prestige for saving him.

>Do you save him?
Yes
>Should you be required to save him?
No

Yes.

First save, then determine race.
If low IQ dindu then deport.
Nat Socs are peaceful creatures.

Save him and jerk off on his face

Stay golden 4chin

Noble answer sir

I think the real question op is: does saving him make you a good person?

WHAT RACE/ORIENTATION/GENDER/RELIGION IS IT???

fpbp

is he white and based?
niggers sink and panic flail in water, they'll drown you with them trying to save them

i take note of the tide and the place where he died to collect the body for later use

Depends on the circumstances. Am I capable of saving him? Is there anyone else already trying to save him?

If he is white does he appear to be jewish. If jewish let him drown

would I save a somali refugee drowning in a sunken dingy boat? No thanks

you spelled "invader" wrong

I save him. It's not for him; it's for me.

How cold is the water? Is he stuck is rapids? Is there someone else there who is more suitable to make a rescue?

The world isn’t black and white.

oh shit my bad, I meant subhuman invader

I'd do what I could because I feel like that's the moral thing to do.

I'm going to assume the drowning man in question is native to my city and is drowning in a lake, not a rough sea.

Yes I would plunge in to save him.
No I should not be required to.
However not saving a drowning man is extremely dishonorable and you should be considered a girl from that point on.
If the drowning person is a man of good physical health your loss of honor goes down by some 80%, if it's a woman or a child the loss of honor is increased tenfold.

However if the drowning man is foreign there is no moral obligation to do anything, you could fold out a chair and watch without suffering a loss of honor.

/thread

Depends on how likely I'd be to survive it.

>A similar ruling is found in reference to the question of two Jews walking in the desert, one with a flask of water and one with nothing. There's only enough water for one of them to make it to the village; if they both drink they both will die before they make it. One opinion is that he should let his friend drink and they will both die. The final ruling is like the opinion of Rabbi Akiva who learns from the verse "your brother should live with you" (Leviticus 25), which teaches that your own life precedes the life of another. You have the right to drink your own water and live even though the other person will die. This also is because you are not performing an act to kill the other; you are only passively doing so by saving yourself. (Talmud, Bava Metzia 62a)

>Implying honor means anything
Honor is for the living, glory is of no use to the dead.

kek

Also, if someone is drowning in the pond or creek on my property, I might want to know why the fuck they were trespassing.

What race is he?

Attached: 1521058569453.jpg (960x950, 283K)

FPBP
/thread

>Found the moral relativist

Isn't there a law that say you have to at least try.

I mean if you also can't swim you shouldn't do anything.

I would try but if that person tried to drag me down with him i would defend myself.

/thread

* cue overplayed phil collins song about guy drowning *

The assumption is that you are capable of saving him

>if its private it would depend on who he is
poo logic

>do you save him?
As long as I don't put myself in danger i don't see why not
>should it be required?
Fuck no dipshit

>FAR RIGHT NATIONALIST SAVES DROWNING BLACK MAN FROM A RIVER
>claims 'I didn't want him to die, I just wanted him to return to his ethnic homeland'

imagine the headlines

Attached: swole jesus.jpg (354x404, 39K)

* cue underplayed genesis song about Fang, son of Great Fang *

no since forcing people to do things is itself immoral

it's moral to force people to NOT force people to do things though, like commanding DONT shove people into a river, because you are already going out of your way to do that action yourself so I know you can do it and not do it, however if I say you HAVE to save that person, who am I to know your capabilities to do so, and that line of thinking gives us wonders like communism, where you command people "help" each other on a mass scale despite their ability to and society implodes

>get sued for trying to save his life

Nah, I'll pass.

i like the part where the drums come in and they are really loud cuz the whole part before that iwas not loud and you are LIKE woah thats cool becasue its really loud

Attached: lill_rioliins.jpg (380x448, 40K)

I can't imagine the headlines, CNN can't admit an heroic action from a natsoc but they also can't paint him as a racist when he just saved a niggerlife.

depends on whether he is a jew or a shitskinned trash

Attached: 15198464651950.jpg (600x557, 44K)

Love me some genesis,

Gas the kikes race war now

Attached: D681FFAE-46AD-4942-9325-6C7120A927E7.jpg (900x599, 94K)

Yes, if you can. Simple really.
These philosophical moral
thought games are only useful for just that.
Breaking down how our morality works, not
really to inform from on high how we should
behave in the real world. Only morons think
these things are useful to inform our actions.

They probably wouldn't even report it honestly, would be too confusing for them.
Checked, and good point. You can get in deep shit in the US for providing first aid. I knew a dude who applied a tourniquet to an amputee at the scene of a crash, they took him to court because of it, and he ended up narrowly dodging a prison sentence.

i'd start a homemade explosives how-to general on /k/

Saving someone else forces that person to hold you at high esteem. The account that you saved that person may also cause others to hold you at high esteem as well, it is ultimately good for your reputation although you are not legally required to save someone who is drowning.

If it's safe to save him it should be required that you do so.

Considering this is Sup Forums, only if he agrees with your political outlook. If it's not white, enjoy the view.

If he's white, yeah I'd jump in and save him.
I dont really know how you could require somebody to save him unless you think there should be govt mandated lifeguards posted at every body of water in the country which is fucking stupid. I think that its cowardly not to save him unless you cant because of some tangible reason like age, medical conditions or also not being able to swim. In which case, if you want anything to be required here, it should be teaching people things like basic survival skills in public schools from a young age so less people have to be saved when mother nature wants to be a bitch.

He'd just keep his nose above water and simply walk to shore.

These days people wouldn't know where the fuck food comes from. Put a thousand men in the forest for a month and perhaps a dozen would still be around by the end of it.

Is there even a forest in that sinking swamp you come from?

Real drowning victims are very difficult to spot. It's nothing like in the movies. I know it's a thought experiment but pretty unrealistic.

Everyone regardless of race when actually drowning will grab on to anyone nearby and drag them under in an effort to save themselves. This makes lifeguarding dangerous.

Safest to wait until they pass out and then (maybe) try to recussitate.

he deserves to die if he can't even fucking swim

NAZI GO HOME!
NAZI GO HOME!
NAZI GO HOME!

Attached: SJW Feminist Punch a Nazi.jpg (332x339, 24K)

>Not even bothering to fill in the swastika.
>Not giving him swastika underpants
Why can't the left meme? Why does their humor suck so much ass?

I he really a man, or is he several black garbage bags full of animal grease animated by jewish magic?

Attached: DWJUgbsUMAAWkR4.jpg (430x1024, 67K)

youtube.com/watch?v=PJyzqGiKtOo

depends
if we are both in the water no
shit like this gets you killed

you know humor is like the brain, you have or you don't

You should save him, but only after he passes out, or only by extending a pole or some other sort of object to him.

Jumping in and trying to save a drowning person is a great way to have two people drown.

and no, nobody has an obligation to save anyone at risk of their own life.

well that may be true for others but i'm stronger than everyone else pound per pound and i'm a good swimmer, i can take control of a flailing retard in the water and on land

try save him

and what if you can't save, say you can't swim for example

Attached: IMG-20180313-WA0020.jpg (720x960, 55K)

this

who is that?