An old woman, middle-aged woman, and baby are on a sinking boat and you can only save one. Which and why?

@Little Maiden : That isn't the choice for the purpose of this hypothetical situation. If that were a choice, I would have listed it as a choice.

@Brenda Li : It's a matter of opinion and what your personal morals say, which varies from person to person but tends to vary even more-so when it jumps to someone of a different cultural upbringing.

@Lil' miƨƨ ƁlooƦ ƞ' Đànƒørth : The only problem with that is the baby is currently not a contributor to societey, and for the next 18 years will technically be a leach until then, and there's no guarantee it will become a contributing member of society. The woman, however, is probably a current contributor to society, and society needs her and can do without a single baby. She might have a job and a family that needs her, maybe even a baby of her own. I do acknowledge your logic of the amount of life that has been lived, but I don't agree that is a more important reason than my reason. That's all an opinion though, and thanks for sharing yours. =)

@KatiCar : When you say the baby is helpless unlike the other two, and that's the reason you're saving it, that's actually one of the reasons I would choose not to save it. Economically speaking, and for the overall benefit of society, the elderly woman is probably a financial burden, and the baby is definitely a financial burden. Saving either one of the two would cost society. The middle aged woman, however, is probably a contributor to society, may very well have a job, husband, and kids.

The financial reason is the least of my reasons. I am not heartless. My main reasons are unaffected by the financial reasons, and those main reasons are how prepared they are for death and how much is left undone in their life, including their dreams and aspirations. The middle-aged woman probably has a long lineup of tasks left in life, and dreams/goals, whereas the elderly woman has winded down with fewer responsibilities and has more likely experienced most of the goals she will achieve

..., and the baby does not have anything scheduled, nor has it lived long enough to develop dreams and aspirations like the middle-aged woman.

Basically, my reasoning has to do with what is most likely going on in the minds of these three people. If I were in that situation, like some others have said here, I would not have time to think. Except I would pick the middle-aged woman without hesitation. Ever since I was told this scenario in class a few years ago, I have always thought that. I don't know many people who agree with me, though.

Hey, you guys can't be making new options or scenarios where if you do one thing then you can save two of them or all three or whatever else you said. This is a hypothetical situation, and you must pick one. I suppose you can choose to not save any of them, too, but I don't know who would do that. I think most people, even most bad people, would probably save one rather than letting them all die if it's a split-second decision that did not permit any time to think about it.