Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

735

Below is a moral exercise.

A crazed retard is at the helm of a school bus filled with small children. He has taken the children hostage and the children are told to stay in their seats because of "kudies", also he has insisted they avoid talking to each other. He now has announced that they must go without food and shuns them for suggesting they help get food. Meanwhile, the crazed retard is stopping at various criminal establishments and filling the bus with pedos and murderers in the name of "getting food" for the fake food shortage.

Parents of these children now argue about what to do. Some suggestions are that the crazed retard is actually a genius and is caring for the children properly. Since the bus driver was elected by someone else, other parents suggest they rally together and create a new political party so that in 3.5 years they can vote the crazed retard bus driver out. Other parents find this idea hateful and vie to ban people from talking about the problem.

The moral questions are these:

1) What other suggestions might one have in this situation?

2) Why do you come to these suggestions?

Good luck with this one. I'll be interested in your responses and will reply when I can.

Below is a moral exercise. A crazed retard is at the helm of a school bus filled with small children. He has taken the children hostage and the children are told to stay in their seats because of "kudies", also he has insisted they avoid talking to each other. He now has announced that they must go without food and shuns them for suggesting they help get food. Meanwhile, the crazed retard is stopping at various criminal establishments and filling the bus with pedos and murderers in the name of "getting food" for the fake food shortage. Parents of these children now argue about what to do. Some suggestions are that the crazed retard is actually a genius and is caring for the children properly. Since the bus driver was elected by someone else, other parents suggest they rally together and create a new political party so that in 3.5 years they can vote the crazed retard bus driver out. Other parents find this idea hateful and vie to ban people from talking about the problem. The moral questions are these: 1) What other suggestions might one have in this situation? 2) Why do you come to these suggestions? Good luck with this one. I'll be interested in your responses and will reply when I can.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (18).
[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Great first response. The boundaries of the system can be filled in as we go along and my responses are below.

Is shooting the bus driver an option?

Great try, but because of previous existing laws of democracy, even talking about this idea would get you arrested.

Second though perhaps the bus can be pulled over and some kind of authority can remove the bus driver and rescue the kids and feed them.

Again, by current democracy laws even talking about this would get you arrested for sedition.

Third, If no other option is viable I'll go after the bus drivers family until he releases my kids.

This would also violate current laws.

Please continue to suggest though. Again, a really great first response.

[–] • 3 pts (edited )

When the crazed retard makes the rules, you can't expect to remove him by playing by the rules. Maybe he can be tricked into making a rule that applies to himself, or baiting him into another school bus that is actually empty?

The most difficult problem is that the school bus driver is not acting alone. He's a front man for a group.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Maybe he can be tricked into making a rule that applies to himself, or baiting him into another school bus that is actually empty?

I'm totally with you here. Do you have any more suggestions? I really think this line of thought could be the answer.

The most difficult problem is that the school bus driver is not acting alone. He's a front man for a group.

Indeed, this is also true. The press won't mention this and when the group is pointed out, everyone calls you racists and deplatforms you. Any idea how to help others understand this?

[–] • 3 pts

Well it sounds like in the scenario I have no options left to save my children than to violate the law, which sounds like patriotism to me if the laws are such that taking away food as an acceptable option.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

It's a morally straining exercise, for sure. Before one would violate any laws, all other options should be explored. A real mind-bender in a democratic society, to say the least.

[–] • 1 pt

I would say that its sometimes peoples obligation to break the law. Since we all do it everyday anyway but I think thats a different discussion.

[–] • 1 pt

talking about this idea would get you arrested

So stop talking about ideas and start implementing ideas.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Before implementing anything, some brainstorming is needed. Although, it's almost like one would have to invent parallel, fictional moral dilemmas in order to talk about such ideas.