This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
HYPERtheticals - Questions for Insane Conversations (27 of 50)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Adamsm
There isn't a kitchen staff on the mountain with you. You'll have to know where the meat came from and likely prepare it yourself. lolThen in that case...whichever of the passenger was closest to the middle of life, since he would probably be the easiest to cook.
I've heard it is! Don't remember where I read it though so it's probably not true.Lol.
Post by
432158
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Interest
The Cannibal's Quandary
You are in a plane crash in the Andes Mountains, not unlike those people from the movie
Alive
(or, I suppose, like the 1972 Uruguyan rugby team who experienced this situation in reality). As such, you will be forced to consume the human flesh of the people who died on impact; this will be a terrible experience, but it is the only way for you to survive. Fortunately, you did not know any of the victims personally.
Would you rather eat a dead baby, or would you rather eat a dead elderly person? Would gender play a role in the selection process? And how much would it bother you if this meat turned out to be delicious?
It's a mountain, right...? Well...
Post by
gnomerdon
the game changes when people starve. it's a completely different perspective.
i'd probably be forced to. and it wouldn't matter if it was a dead baby or an elderly person. LOOKS LIKE MEAT'S BACK ON THE MENU!
Post by
Squishalot
In all practicality, both the baby and the elderly would be horrible, because their meat content would be much lower relative to bone / fat, I would think.
I would find a teenager. Someone who doesn't move a muscle in their life, resulting in tender, much more palatable meat.
Post by
Magician22773
I will assume that there are more survivors other than myself in this scenario (as in the movie / Real Life crash).
I would go with the elderly, just because there would be more food from the body. While not something I would want to experience, I would have zero issues with using any available food source to aid in my own survival.
I would also assume that human flesh would be similar to any other animal, in that the younger the animal, the better the meat. But if things are bad enough that I am eating human flesh, I don't think I would be too worried about the taste and texture, but more concerned with the quantity.
Post by
Interest
In all practicality, both the baby and the elderly would be horrible, because their meat content would be much lower relative to bone / fat, I would think.
I would find a teenager. Someone who doesn't move a muscle in their life, resulting in tender, much more palatable meat.
DON'T EAT ME =(
Post by
1069282
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I really don't think I could do it. There were people who refused to do it in the actual circumstances, I think, and they died. I wouldn't pass judgement on the people that did- they're not killing or harming someone, and if they can force themselves through it I wouldn't try to dissuade them. But I got kind of nauseous just thinking about the last part of the question, and so I don't think I could get past the mental block.
Post by
b4xx
From what I've heard, human meat actually tastes pretty bad compared to almost any other animal. Probably the cause of our lifestyles...
Another thing I've heard, is that the "tastiest" part of a human is the little piece of meat on your palm which connects the wrist and the thumb. Can't figure out why, though.
Anyways, this is pretty much like my view.
if things are bad enough that I am eating human flesh, I don't think I would be too worried about the taste and texture, but more concerned with the quantity.
I don't think I'd be bothered by the taste, if I was in that situation. I think I'd rather eat an elderly male than a baby, though. I don't know why male, it just feels less gross to me. Feels less like committing cannibalism.
Post by
Sas148
Ahh nice of you to bring up the gender thing... others hasn't really touched that particular question.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skreeran
They're already dead? Assuming I didn't have any way to store it, I would try to eat as much as I could right off the bat, to avoid wasting it. If I could keep it cold, then I would eat the elderly person first, because the baby would be easier to transport for food on the way down the mountain (assuming I can get down).
Post by
Sas148
The Free-Wheeling Architect
You are close friends with a wonderful 30-year old woman who has never been in a romantic relationship. At long last, she meets a man who she seems to like (and who likes her). He is 35, a successful architect, relatively attractive, and refreshingly unguarded. In fact, he is so unguarded that -- during the first meal you ever share with him -- he stoically tells the entire table a stunning story. This is his anecdote: "When I was twelve years old, I was playing with my neighbor on a railroad bridge near our home. No one else was around. We got into an argument, and I pushed him off the bridge, killing him instantly. I told everyone it was an accident and I never got in any trouble, but I knew what I was doing. At the time, I truly wanted to kill him. Now, in retrospect, it was obviously wrong. I wish I had not killed that person. But that was twenty-three years ago. Little kids do crazy things. You know how it goes."
The next day, your female friend asks if she should continue pursuing this relationship. How do you advise her?
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
Yeah she needs to run. If there is no emotional attachment to the idea that he killed a child, even if he has some kind of logical recognition that it was wrong, then there is something wrong with him.
Post by
1069282
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Patty
Yeah she needs to run. If there is no emotional attachment to the idea that he killed a child, even if he has some kind of logical recognition that it was wrong, then there is something wrong with him.
Basically.
Post by
Interest
I'd tell her to do what I do.
Not bother with relationships.
Post by
Sas148
The Mind Killer
You become friends with a charismatic Spanish insurance salesman who claims to be a mystic. At first, you think he is just an interesting weirdo. But then a mutual acquaintance mysteriously dies in his sleep, and your Spanish friend tells you, "I killed that guy. I killed him with my mind." You find this disturbing and inappropriate, but you decide to let it go. Two weeks later, an unpopular local politician dies in his sleep. "I killed that man, too," says your Spanish friend. "I killed him with my mind." This is annoying and tasteless, but -- once again -- you let it go. The very next day, the Spanish insurance salesman calls you on the telephone and says, "Check the newspaper and see what I did with my mind. It's in the entertainment section." When you open the newspaper, you see an obituary for singer-songwriter Tori Amos; the article says she mysteriously died the night before. Technically, this proves nothing. But you nonetheless confront your Spanish friend and tell him that you've grown tired of all of this hypothetical mind murdering and that you no longer want to be his friend. "Don't you dare shut me out of your life," he says. "You are my best friend. You
must
remain in my life. I'm not sure what I would do if you ever betrayed me."
Do you remain friends with this possibly delusional, possibly dangerous Spaniard?
You have no physical proof that he can actually kill people with his mind.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.