Interesting thought experiment, friends

dogman6126

dogman6126

Community Member
MBTI
ENFJ-wasINFJ
Ok so here's a thought experiment I've heard about, and I was looking for some people's opinions. Here's the situation:

So your at the top of a really tall building, let's say the space needle, hanging for your life. Let's suppose you are able to contact your three best friends to have them come save you. When they arrive and see you hanging there, they step back for fear of being pulled over with you. Then you fall, and somehow survive.

The question is, would you actually want to know that when it came down to it, you couldn't actually trust your friends?

Would you wish you hadn't challenged your friends like you did? Or would you rather know, and maybe cut your losses? Find new friends? Or maybe something else entirely. What do you guys think?
 
I think the will to survive is stronger than the desire to save someone in most people. I would probably forgive them but just feel like a superior human being because I would have saved them if the situation were reversed.
 
Odd. Couldnt trust them? They came when called. They assessed and made a decision just as I would do.

I would not expect them to kill themselves to save me nor kill us both in the attempt. I would expect them to make their best attempt to save me in a way that would nit result in their death.

I do not understand this question to be honest. Is a measure of a friend you trust only someone who would kill themselves in an attempt to save you?
 
Eventhorizon said:
Odd. Couldnt trust them? They came when called. They assessed and made a decision just as I would do.

I would not expect them to kill themselves to save me nor kill us both in the attempt. I would expect them to make their best attempt to save me in a way that would nit result in their death.

I do not understand this question to be honest. Is a measure of a friend you trust only someone who would kill themselves in an attempt to save you?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, allow me to clarify. The idea is that yes they came, but also that they didn't even try to save you simply out of fear, not capability. The idea is that they potentially could have saved you, but because of their own fear of death they didn't.
 
dogman6126 said:
I'm sorry, allow me to clarify. The idea is that yes they came, but also that they didn't even try to save you simply out of fear, not capability. The idea is that they potentially could have saved you, but because of their own fear of death they didn't.
Click to expand...
If they knew they could save me but did not out of fear. I would forgive them and still consider them friends. Fear is a very powerful thing.
I would dislike my poor choice of who I decided to call though.
 
Eventhorizon said:
If they knew they could save me but did not out of fear. I would forgive them and still consider them friends. Fear is a very powerful thing.
I would dislike my poor choice of who I decided to call though.
Click to expand...

That's an opinion I've not heard before. Interesting :)
 
I have only two people to call in such a scenario and they would already be there with me and would most likely have planned ahead for all manner of disasters. It would be inconceivable that they would fail but if at any point they could not save me, I guess we would know it was time to say farewell.

I wouldn't bother calling anyone else. By and large people are useless.
 
Last edited:
If someone flinches in a situation like that I don't think I would hold it against them. I'm fine with knowing that my friends wouldn't risk their lives for me.

I think that if anything I wouldn't want it to weigh them down, knowing that they wouldn't or couldn't save a friend.



Also, in regards to your clarification - I think it is silly to hold their fear of death against them.
 
Elis said:
If someone flinches in a situation like that I don't think I would hold it against them. I'm fine with knowing that my friends wouldn't risk their lives for me.

I think that if anything I wouldn't want it to weigh them down, knowing that they wouldn't or couldn't save a friend.



Also, in regards to your clarification - I think it is silly to hold their fear of death against them.
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll play devil's advocate here, lol
Isn't a friend someone you should trust with anything about anything, and also someone who would be there for you always? If you can't trust them with your life, what would that mean?
 
This scenario is too implausible to compute, but no, this wouldn't change my opinion of my friends.

I might wish I hadn't called them because I should rather call somebody who is trained for saving people from tall structures.

dogman6126 said:
Ok, I'll play devil's advocate here, lol
Isn't a friend someone you should trust with anything about anything, and also someone who would be there for you always? If you can't trust them with your life, what would that mean?
Click to expand...

No, that's not a friend, that's quixotic.
 
sprinkles said:
This scenario is too implausible to compute, but no, this wouldn't change my opinion of my friends.

I might wish I hadn't called them because I should rather call somebody who is trained for saving people from tall structures.



No, that's not a friend, that's quixotic.
Click to expand...

This scenario isn't supposed to be realistic, it's a thought experiment that talks about knowledge like what should be known or what we might want to know.

And sorry, I misidentified. Instead of friend, I meant to ask isn't that what a best friend is supposed to be. And I suppose that can very much be based on opinion, but my opinion is that's what a best friend should be. Such friends have and do exist, so I wouldn't say that's unrealistic.
 
dogman6126 said:
This scenario isn't supposed to be realistic, it's a thought experiment that talks about knowledge like what should be known or what we might want to know.

And sorry, I misidentified. Instead of friend, I meant to ask isn't that what a best friend is supposed to be. And I suppose that can very much be based on opinion, but my opinion is that's what a best friend should be. Such friends have and do exist, so I wouldn't say that's unrealistic.
Click to expand...

I think it's implausible because I shouldn't judge friends on scenarios which are incredibly unlikely to happen.

And sure there are people who would save your life but I don't believe in picking them with that in mind, unless you exist in a war zone at which point it might become a good idea.
 
What a silly-ass question.

I trust my friends to know how to determine feasibility in situations and I wouldn't fault them for being scared out of their wits. I reserve ire in that kind of situation for random people who I don't know.

Or, what sprinkles said.
 
sprinkles said:
I think it's implausible because I shouldn't judge friends on scenarios which are incredibly unlikely to happen.

And sure there are people who would save your life but I don't believe in picking them with that in mind, unless you exist in a war zone at which point it might become a good idea.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't judge any real life friends based on this thought experiment. Your right in that would be unreasonable. In fact you most likely wouldn't know how your best friend might actually act in such a scenario. However, we can still fairly consider the situation. The idea is similar to the notion of "ignorance is bliss" or that one should know where they stand and that includes standing with their friends. Both are viable perspectives with different merits and with different interesting consequences.

This thought experiment is not to question who your friends are or who you should be friends with in the sense of practical uses. This thought experiment is to question something like the following. You are in a dire situation, so you call those you trust above all others. However in the moment when it mattered most, they did not act simply out of fear, even though you thought you could trust them to act. Then when you survive, you question whether you are better off knowing or not. I admit this question does have an assumption that best friends are people that you trust above all others and that they should help you whenever possible.
The idea isn't picking your friends with notions of survival, I think that the idea of saving your life comes from them likeing you so much as a friend that they would risk themselves to save you. Instead of thinking only of themselves, they also think of you. Not that saving you is a prerequisite to picking your friends, rather it is a side effect of being friends. That is certainly something that a best friend should do (meaning care for you a great deal). If they won't really risk themselves to save you, then how can you say they are a best friend. The question of keeping them as friends does not stem from practical applications I think. Rather, this display of inaction demonstrating the extent to which this supposed best friend actually cares about you.

Perhaps it will be clearer if I reformulate the point to say that they step back and did not help you while they knew very well that they could have helped you. Lets suppose that they certainly could have saved you, but fear and only fear is what stopped them. Now would you rather know that you can't trust those people when it really matters? This raises the question of if they actually care about you. On the other hand, would you rather not know that you can't trust them so that you don't question the extent to which they care for you, and you can go on in your life pretending that they truly do care for you?
 
SealHammer said:
What a silly-ass question.

I trust my friends to know how to determine feasibility in situations and I wouldn't fault them for being scared out of their wits. I reserve ire in that kind of situation for random people who I don't know.

Or, what sprinkles said.
Click to expand...

I'm curious, why do you suggest that you would apply blame to those who don't necessarily have a stake in saving your life, but you wouldn't apply blame to those that actually do have a stake in saving your life. It seems to me that it would make more sense to expect a best friend to save your life rather than a stranger. I suppose if you say that there is absolutely no way to save your life, in which case you would forgive your friends, but why would you then blame the stranger? On the other hand, if there is a possibility of saving your life, shouldn't you expect your friends to try to save you before expecting a stranger to save you?
 
dogman6126 said:
I'm curious, why do you suggest that you would apply blame to those who don't necessarily have a stake in saving your life, but you wouldn't apply blame to those that actually do have a stake in saving your life. It seems to me that it would make more sense to expect a best friend to save your life rather than a stranger. I suppose if you say that there is absolutely no way to save your life, in which case you would forgive your friends, but why would you then blame the stranger? On the other hand, if there is a possibility of saving your life, shouldn't you expect your friends to try to save you before expecting a stranger to save you?
Click to expand...

It's because I know and like my friends. I don't know (and therefore can't like) random strangers. I hold random people to the same absurd standards I do myself, whereas my friends tend to get a free pass for having run the gauntlet and survived.
 
[MENTION=11455]dogman6126[/MENTION]
I've known a lot of people who I wouldn't trust to that degree.

I guess I could know and it wouldn't bother me because most of the time I probably wouldn't be surprised. Knowing could be kind of oddly morbid though.

I also usually know when somebody cares or not but a lot of people are just too flighty in crisis situations and probably couldn't even save themselves.
 
Guess we must have three best friends to play?
 
OK. First and foremost, I wouldn't place myself in that situation. However, I almost feel I'm already there with life circumstances. Only people I know that would try to do something to help me would be my parents, but they have passed on. Wait: now I feel someone holding onto my heel. All of a sudden, my situation has become more important to deal with. I gather my7 strength, get the person to safety, then find myself again in the same situation. They know the dangers and how they felt to them, so they are not going to help me, either. I may just let go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top