You can go back in time and kill one person as a baby — preventing a genocide that kills 10 million people. The baby is innocent.
0 votes worldwide
Not enough votes yet to show a result.
Vote on this dilemma
You haven't voted on this one yet — cast your choice and see how it splits.
Vote now →Read the expert analysisDecision Science
This is the trolley problem extended to a person who has not yet done anything. The baby is innocent in any operational sense — they will become someone who isn't, but you can't have their consent and you can't separate killing-them-now from punishing-the-future-them for an act they haven't committed. The expected-good math is enormous; the categorical wrongness of killing an innocent infant is also enormous.
Why people split
People split on whether innocence is a function of what someone has done or of what they are. If innocence is about acts, the baby is innocent now but the future adult won't be — and killing the precursor prevents that wrongdoing. If innocence is about the person, killing an infant is killing an infant, regardless of who they would have grown into.
Educational perspective, not professional advice.
Send via messages, stories, or copy link
Was this dilemma interesting?
⚡ Challenge a friend!
Send them the link — they'll see your result only after they vote.
More share optionsInstagram, TikTok, X, WhatsApp, Discord, Telegram, story card
📱 Share as Story
Download a 9:16 card for Instagram Stories or TikTok.
Auto-posting is not available from the web. Upload the PNG manually.
What the split says
These questions test what you would actually do, not what sounds good in the abstract. Once votes come in, this section will show how voters balance immediate safety against later consequences.
Worth asking yourself
- What cost are you more willing to accept?
- Could you live with the outcome you skipped?