Moral Dilemma
You live in an apartment with several other people and were arriving home late from work only to find that the whole complex is on fire. You see two neighbors on the front lawn. One of your neighbors is busy talking to the 911 operator and trying to call for the fire department. You ask the other neighbor, who is so severely burned that he can not move effectively, what the situation is. Your neighbor informs you this: There are seven individuals still inside that apartment: a clinically brain dead relative of his, a severely mentally handicapped woman, an infant, your dog, a senile old man, a man, and a pregnant woman. The fire had recently started but is quickly spreading and they are all unconscious.
You assess the situation and realize that you may be able to save some of the seven individuals inside but not all. You don't know how many you can save, but rush in nevertheless to save someone. Once inside the apartment, you then run a mental list of who you should save first. You know where each of the individuals are because you've lived with these individuals long enough to know where each of their rooms are.
The question is this: who would you save first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and last? Make a list and justify it.
It is guaranteed that you will not be able to save the last individual on your list.
No cutting corners.
Mine would be :
Oh and btw you can't get any of the rescued people to help you rescue anyone else.
Taken from here :
http://www.tombraiderforums.com/showthread.php?t=180668