CDZ Can you be rational?

[PaintMyHouse]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I call that an act of God. I am not going to jump into the fire to save a burning baby.

A car about to explode is an Act of God? No.

Of course it is when God made Man his favorite creature.

And with that nothing more need be said. Irrational to the core.

Called Prisoner's Dilemma in Psychology. Basically hooray for me and fuck them.

The prisoner's dilemma is what happens if one of two talks, both talk, or neither talk to the police after committing a crime? That has nothing to with this.

Prisoner's dilemma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Two Thumbs]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The girl.

B/c I tell her to grab the boy as I'm running twards her

TY, and you fail.

how so?

there was no rule stating that the girl couldn't help, you assumed that.

so I win and your small mind loses yet again

 

[Two Thumbs]

Can you be rational?

No, pmh can't be.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The girl.

B/c I tell her to grab the boy as I'm running twards her

TY, and you fail.

how so?

there was no rule stating that the girl couldn't help, you assumed that.

so I win and your small mind loses yet again

You tried to change the conditions of the test. Next time, don't.

 

[xband]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The girl.

B/c I tell her to grab the boy as I'm running twards her

TY, and you fail.

how so?

there was no rule stating that the girl couldn't help, you assumed that.

so I win and your small mind loses yet again

You tried to change the conditions of the test. Next time, don't.

I can argue with the teacher that my answer is correct and get the test question changed and answers changed. Nobody is perfect including teachers and test writers. The degrgatory rebuttal from the teacher, you are bright, you are as bright the Sun.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The girl.

B/c I tell her to grab the boy as I'm running twards her

TY, and you fail.

how so?

there was no rule stating that the girl couldn't help, you assumed that.

so I win and your small mind loses yet again

You tried to change the conditions of the test. Next time, don't.

I can argue with the teacher that my answer was right and get the test question changed and answers changed. Nobody is perfect including teachers and test writers.

The question is clear, you can save only one, so pick one or the other? Both is not an option.

 

[xband]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The girl.

B/c I tell her to grab the boy as I'm running twards her

TY, and you fail.

how so?

there was no rule stating that the girl couldn't help, you assumed that.

so I win and your small mind loses yet again

You tried to change the conditions of the test. Next time, don't.

I can argue with the teacher that my answer is correct and get the test question changed and answers changed. Nobody is perfect including teachers and test writers. The derogatory rebuttal from the teacher, you are bright, you are brighter than the Sun.

 

[xband]

The girl.

B/c I tell her to grab the boy as I'm running twards her

TY, and you fail.

how so?

there was no rule stating that the girl couldn't help, you assumed that.

so I win and your small mind loses yet again

You tried to change the conditions of the test. Next time, don't.

I can argue with the teacher that my answer was right and get the test question changed and answers changed. Nobody is perfect including teachers and test writers.

The question is clear, you can save only one, so pick one or the other? Both is not an option.

All of the above or none of the above and if in doubt pick C.

 

[Elvis Obama]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since you do not state that the person I choose not to save will die, the obvious choice is the infant. The teenager has a chance to save herself, therefore creating the possibility that both will live.

I don't accept the rationale that the female, being closer to reproductive age, is more worthy of being saved. Based on what? The amount of food and other resources that have been expended on her to date? The male has the greater chance to preserve genetic diversity.

Fine, and, you fail at being rational. TY.

No, you failed at asking the question properly. I thank you for your unearned arrogance.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since you do not state that the person I choose not to save will die, the obvious choice is the infant. The teenager has a chance to save herself, therefore creating the possibility that both will live.

I don't accept the rationale that the female, being closer to reproductive age, is more worthy of being saved. Based on what? The amount of food and other resources that have been expended on her to date? The male has the greater chance to preserve genetic diversity.

Fine, and, you fail at being rational. TY.

No, you failed at asking the question properly. I thank you for your unearned arrogance.

The question is perfectly clear. Based on the information, pick one? You were unable to do so therefore you fail.

 

[Elvis Obama]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since you do not state that the person I choose not to save will die, the obvious choice is the infant. The teenager has a chance to save herself, therefore creating the possibility that both will live.

I don't accept the rationale that the female, being closer to reproductive age, is more worthy of being saved. Based on what? The amount of food and other resources that have been expended on her to date? The male has the greater chance to preserve genetic diversity.

Fine, and, you fail at being rational. TY.

No, you failed at asking the question properly. I thank you for your unearned arrogance.

The question is perfectly clear. Based on the information, pick one? You were unable to do so therefore you fail.

Again, what in the question states that whoever I fail to pick will die? Nothing. It merely says that I can only save one. If you wish to create an "either or" situation, you must make that clear. You failed to do so.

You are also, as I previously stated, unpleasantly arrogant. Something which is seldom a trait of the truly rational.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since you do not state that the person I choose not to save will die, the obvious choice is the infant. The teenager has a chance to save herself, therefore creating the possibility that both will live.

I don't accept the rationale that the female, being closer to reproductive age, is more worthy of being saved. Based on what? The amount of food and other resources that have been expended on her to date? The male has the greater chance to preserve genetic diversity.

Fine, and, you fail at being rational. TY.

No, you failed at asking the question properly. I thank you for your unearned arrogance.

The question is perfectly clear. Based on the information, pick one? You were unable to do so therefore you fail.

Again, what in the question states that whoever I fail to pick will die? Nothing. It merely says that I can only save one. If you wish to create an "either or" situation, you must make that clear. You failed to do so.

You are also, as I previously stated, unpleasantly arrogant. Something which is seldom a trait of the truly rational.

The question was clear. You could not answer without trying to change the test.

You were asked which would you save and why? You couldn't answer. Now go away.

 

[TooTall]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If they were both on the passenger side of the car I would open the front door so the teen could possibly get out on her own but my priority would be to get the infant out of the back seat. If they were on opposite sides, the infant gets the priority.

Okay, TY, and you failed BTW, you are not rational in this case.

I gave the teenage girl a chance to save herself and chose to save the infant since he/she is helpless. The rule was I could only save one and that is all I did. That seemed rational to me. Using your reason that the girl could reproduce sooner makes no sense to a rational person.

 

[Two Thumbs]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The girl.

B/c I tell her to grab the boy as I'm running twards her

TY, and you fail.

how so?

there was no rule stating that the girl couldn't help, you assumed that.

so I win and your small mind loses yet again

You tried to change the conditions of the test. Next time, don't.

I did not change anything.

In front of you is a burning car no distance is indicated and o angle about to explode this is something I can not know. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back no statement as to their condition. You can save only one I did. Who is the most rational one to save, and why? My choice was the most logical, just b/c you didn't think of it doesn't make it not so.

 

[Two Thumbs]

poor leftist pmh, can't think outside the his box so anyone that does is wrong.

 

[320 Years of History]

To be a truly rational thinker you have to be able to make decisions based on very limited information and back up your reasoning. "I'm not sure why" or "I don't know" doesn't count.

A test (and feel free to post your own of course):

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

You cannot change the conditions of the test and that's all the information you have to go on. Points if you even attempt an answer (most won't)...


FYI:

"Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is named after the classical Greek philosopher Socrates. Elenchus is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themselves in some way, thus weakening the defender's point. This method is introduced by Socrates in Plato's Theaetetus as midwifery (maieutics) because it is employed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding."
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The girl.

B/c I tell her to grab the boy as I'm running twards her

TY, and you fail.

how so?

there was no rule stating that the girl couldn't help, you assumed that.

so I win and your small mind loses yet again

You tried to change the conditions of the test. Next time, don't.

I did not change anything.

In front of you is a burning car no distance is indicated and o angle about to explode this is something I can not know. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back no statement as to their condition. You can save only one I did. Who is the most rational one to save, and why? My choice was the most logical, just b/c you didn't think of it doesn't make it not so.

Let's just cut to the chase...I don't know where the OP-er obtained the question, but I'm nearly certain the OP-er has misrepresented key elements of the "test" from square one.

The dilemma presented in the OP is but an abbreviated and bastardized variation of what is widely known in philosophy and psychology as Philippa Foot's "trolley problem." It is a thinking "test" of sorts, but it's aim is to gauge one's thinking in an ethical/moral thinking, not one's rational/intellectual acumen. Even in "gauging" one's moral thinking, it's still has no binary answers, whereas the OP has attempted to recast the thing so that it does. Quite simply, there is no right or wrong answer to "trolley test" type questions.

I would have thought by now the OP would have "come clean" with folks, but clearly s/he has no desire to do so. I can only postulate that s/he is reveling in her discovery that, as she accurately stated, not all lives are of equal value. While that is so, and certainly at a societal level one can make broad generalizations about which classes of lives have more and less absolute value, at an individual level, which life is most valuable can only be determined situationally.

Regardless, few of us care to make such a reckoning let alone act on it -- that may be the point of the OP's "points if you try" remark -- even at a societal level which allows one to perceive one's choice in the abstract, much as fighter pilots think of themselves as shooting down/killing planes rather than other human beings. Tests of the "trolley test's" ilk, make palpable among other things the need to dehumanize one's opponents in situations like war, police actions, and so on.

I bid one consider the Christmas armistice from WWI when men from both sides met in no-man's-land and essentially "partied" before returning to their respective trenches and later killing one another. Whoever thought that "get together" would be a good idea and allowed it to happen was an idiot. It was good, until it wasn't. Can you imagine what must have gone through the minds of the men who later saw they'd just shot the guy with whom they'd just shared a drink and some laughs, maybe traded stories photos of their kids or wife/girlfriend back home? Talk about PTSD....geez....

For more "scoop" on and fun with the trolley problem, check out:

• A Solution to the Trolley Problem | Philosophy Walk
  
• Should You Kill The Fat Man? -- At this link, one'll find another variant of the trolley problem, however, it's approach is entertaining to some degree.
• The Trolley Problem
• The Puppy or the Child -- Another variation and some discussion, but with a lot less scholarly and detailed discussion than the first and third references.

 

[Dekster]

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

It is rational to save either or neither.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

It is rational to save either or neither.

It is rational to save one or the other. Which, and why?

 

[westwall]

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

It is rational to save either or neither.

It is rational to save one or the other. Whch, and why?

Typical simplistic thought. Infant has a IQ of 180 that no one knows about, girl suffers from leukemia. Values change with one bit of information for either child. PMH chooses simplistic non thinking and wants us all to believe that it is rational. It is not rational, it is merely simplistic.

 

[Dekster]

In front of you is a burning car about to explode. There are two people in the car, a teenage girl in the front and an infant boy in the back. You can save only one. Who is the most rational one to save, and why?

It is rational to save either or neither.

It is rational to save one or the other. Whch, and why?

It could be rational to save the boy; it could be rational to save the girl; it could be rational not to save either. There is no right reason, just a matter of preference. For instance, saving the girl because she can reproduce is just as rational as saving the boy because he is incapable of saving himself or has the longest potential life as not saving either of them because your first duty is to save yourself, not someone else. There is no inherently right or wrong answer.