At the end of the semester, students had to write a 5-paragraph essay on a thought experiment adapted from the book "The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten" by Julian Baggini. Each student was presented a different thought experiment. Here are two student samples.To Live or To Donate
by Wang Shayue (Sophia)
One day, Dick got drunk after a party. After waking up the next morning, he was mistaken for a volunteer in a new life-saving procedure. He quickly called over a doctor to explain his situation. However, the doctor said that if Dick wouldn't cooperate, the world famous violinist who was depending on him would die. Dick said that they had no right to let him give up nine months of his life to save him. After I read this story, I wanted to know why Dick should donate his vital organ to the violinist. Some people say that if Dick is entitled to disconnect himself then why aren't pregnant women entitled to abort their fetuses? I disagree with this analogy because I think that if people need to donate vital organs to others, it is different from pregnant women aborting their fetuses.
Some people donate their vital organs to others to help other people who need the organs live longer. However, the donor may die. That is to say, they donate their life to others to help them survive. If the person is dying or has an incurable disease, I think it's right for him to donate the organ to others who need it. But Dick had made a mistake; he didn't want to give up his life. It's his right to live. Of course, the violinist has a life. Don't you think that Dick also has a life? As for the pregnant women, it is well known that not all of them want to abort their fetuses.
Maybe some of them want to do it, but not many of them. According to The Abortion Act in America, in addition to endangering the lives and health of women, they can abort their fetuses. So Dick's action is legal while not all abortions are right.
On reasonable terms, Dick has his own right to choose to live or to donate his organ to the violinist. However, the pregnant women who are healthy have no right to choose if the baby needs to die. The baby is also a person so he has his own right to make the decision if he wants to live; the mother does not have this decision. Nowadays we can find that if a mother kills her child, not only should she be brought to justice, but also she should be condemned by morality and public opinions.
No one can decide the fate of others. Although if Dick chooses to live, the violinist will die; it's the instinct of human beings. Many people want to know whose dilemma is more difficult, Dick's or a woman who would like an abortion. I have to admit that the first one is more difficult. The first reason is that Dick doesn't want to give up his life while the woman wants to have an abortion. Next, if he doesn't do it, another person who needs his organ will die. He can be condemned by the soul. That's why I believe Dick's side is more difficult.
To live or to donate his vital organ to others, that is the question. Personally, Dick can stand up for his right, whether he does it or not. So if Dick doesn't want to donate his vital organs to others, it's not illegal. However, not all pregnant woman can abort their fetuses.
Bank Error
by Grace
When Richard went to the ATM, he got a very pleasant surprise. He requested $200 with a receipt, but he got $20,000 with a receipt. He checked his account online. His account had been debited for only $200. Nobody was going to ask for the money, so he did feel a little guilty. In real life, I think that if people get the money, some of them would return the money to the bank. A lot of people would think they were lucky. If I got a big amount of money someday, maybe I wouldn't want to return the money to the bank as well. Although I didn't get the money by myself, I think this behavior is not stealing.
I have witnessed my friend who got a big amount of money from another friend through a transfer. That other friend made a mistake about the amount of money, giving him $1000 more. But he was an honest person, so he told his friend about the mistake. Although this was the mistake of a person rather than the bank, I think people would behave the same as my friend. I would like to ask, "How many people would do the same for another person?"
Today, the situation concerns the bank's security system. Actually, if I caused the problem myself, I think it would be a dilemma. Maybe I would wait for the bank to take the money back by calling me after a long time. If the bank doesn't discover the problem, they won't have good results, and I will tell them. I think this is evidence of a great mind. However, if I urgently need the money, maybe I will take the money first only to return the money one day in the future.
In our life, sometimes we take the wrong luggage at the airport. In this case, I would more likely feel guilty because it is not our fault. For example, my mother's friend was asked to pay the bank $300 a few years ago. But she later found out that she didn't have to pay the bank that money. The bank had made a mistake. She was a little angry and asked the bank why she had to pay that amount. They apologized, so we often can see similar cases around us.
Sometimes problems like these can be seen in our life, but we know that deceit is not good thinking. If this situation happens to us, we are in a dilemma. Is it worth to think about returning the money or not? I think that it is difficult to choose.
