Thursday, May 19, 2011

Risk for a Reason

In the event of a disaster, would most people risk their lives to save a stranger? Think of true stories you have heard about people who, facing danger and death, save the lives of strangers. Why do some people risk their own lives to save others? Why do some people look out for themselves first? Which do you think you would do? Do you think that the reason for the disaster would make a difference? For example, if there is a disaster because people foolishly put themselves at risk, would you be less willing to help than if the victims had no responsibility for their situation, such as in a natural disaster?

In the event of an immediate disaster, most people act on impulse to save others - it seems a burst of adrenaline or other hormones prompt an immediate "flight or fight" response that, for some people, causes them to rush to save others. In cases where one is able to think clearly about the pros and cons for helping others in a situation, one is much less likely to extend a helping hand. However, even for an immediate situation, I think a split second of decision is made, albeit subconsciously.

Some people, I believe, just possess an innate nature of selflessness. Other quote en quote "sensible" people will carefully weight the options before deciding whether rescue is worth it. People look out for themselves first because it's human nature to do so - simple economics (and Darwin, I guess) will teach you that everyone acts in their self-interest in order to compete and survive. However humans - and animals as well - aren't always self-centered. In some events, we will commit altruistic actions that seem to contradict the theory of rational self-interest, to protect the general welfare of others.

The reason for the disaster can prompt people to be more or less responsive to aid. For example, if a fireman is to put his life at risk to save a man who tried to climb Taipei 101, he would probably be suppressing a grumble as he climbs the ladder, as opposed to if he were saving a screaming infant in a burning mansion.
In addition, the person he is saving will affect his decision as well. Between saving a drug addict and a dedicated World War II veteran, one would probably choose the latter. In addition, how much the individual can later contribute to society can affect the decision as well. Like in the film Saving Private Ryan, everyone was reluctant to save the one life of James Ryan - and at the end of the film, Tom Hanks' character tells him to "earn it."

Nevertheless, each life saved is still a human life. I would like to believe that in the split second when aid is necessary I will be able to provide it. If I am thoroughly capable of helping another, I hope I will do so. But I was taught never to save a drowning man and never do mouth-to-mouth, for fear of dying yourself and procuring AIDS, respectively.

No comments:

Post a Comment