A group of small children were playing near two railway lines. The first path is the path who is active (still often bypassed KA), while the second line had been inactive. Only a child who plays in the lane who is not active (never again pass through KA), while others who play on railway line is still active.
Note: KA=RAILWAY.
Suddenly it appears there was oncoming train with high speed, and you happen to be in the front panel of regulating the direction of the railway crossing TSB. Are you going to move into the direction of the railway TSB sdh path is off and save most of the little child who was playing? But this means you are sacrificing a child who was playing in the railroad who is not active. Or you'll let the train was on track TSB who should?
Let's stop and think what decisions should we take?
Think carefully about your answer ...., and after you are sure with your answer, you just continue reading downward.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Most people will choose to move toward the train and only cost the lives of a child. You may have the same options as with most of the children rescued and only losing a child is a rational and verifiable segitigaini legalized both morally and emotionally. But are you aware bhw children who choose to play on the railroad who had been inactive, who was on the right because he has chosen to play in the harbor? In addition, he must be sacrificed instead krn teman2nya carelessness that was playing in a dangerous place. This kind of dilemma happens around us every day. At work, in society, in politics and especially in democratic life, the minority must be sacrificed for the sake of the majority.
No matter how stupid and neglectful of the majority party. Life of a child who chooses not to play with her friends at a dangerous railroad has dikesampingkan.Dan maybe even we will not regret this incident.
A friend who had forwarded the story is of the opinion that he would not change the direction of the train because he believed the rate of children who play on the railway line is still active is very aware that the line is still active. As a result they will immediately run away when she heard the train approaching. If speed of the train changed direction to the point who is not active then a child who was playing in the path of TSB would be killed, krn he never thought the train going towards the path bhw TSB. Besides, the reason a railroad disabled possibly because the pathway was unsafe. When the train speed is changed to inactive lines, then we have caused harm to the passengers on the train. And maybe that has taken steps to rescue a group of children at the expense of a child, will be sacrificed again hundreds of lives of passengers in the train. We must realize that life is full of tough decisions who created hrs. And maybe we'll realize bhw off a quick decision segitigaini ill always be true.
One more thing to remember .... in our society today:
something that really is not always popular
and something like is not always true ......
Note: KA=RAILWAY.
Suddenly it appears there was oncoming train with high speed, and you happen to be in the front panel of regulating the direction of the railway crossing TSB. Are you going to move into the direction of the railway TSB sdh path is off and save most of the little child who was playing? But this means you are sacrificing a child who was playing in the railroad who is not active. Or you'll let the train was on track TSB who should?
Let's stop and think what decisions should we take?
Think carefully about your answer ...., and after you are sure with your answer, you just continue reading downward.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Most people will choose to move toward the train and only cost the lives of a child. You may have the same options as with most of the children rescued and only losing a child is a rational and verifiable segitigaini legalized both morally and emotionally. But are you aware bhw children who choose to play on the railroad who had been inactive, who was on the right because he has chosen to play in the harbor? In addition, he must be sacrificed instead krn teman2nya carelessness that was playing in a dangerous place. This kind of dilemma happens around us every day. At work, in society, in politics and especially in democratic life, the minority must be sacrificed for the sake of the majority.
No matter how stupid and neglectful of the majority party. Life of a child who chooses not to play with her friends at a dangerous railroad has dikesampingkan.Dan maybe even we will not regret this incident.
A friend who had forwarded the story is of the opinion that he would not change the direction of the train because he believed the rate of children who play on the railway line is still active is very aware that the line is still active. As a result they will immediately run away when she heard the train approaching. If speed of the train changed direction to the point who is not active then a child who was playing in the path of TSB would be killed, krn he never thought the train going towards the path bhw TSB. Besides, the reason a railroad disabled possibly because the pathway was unsafe. When the train speed is changed to inactive lines, then we have caused harm to the passengers on the train. And maybe that has taken steps to rescue a group of children at the expense of a child, will be sacrificed again hundreds of lives of passengers in the train. We must realize that life is full of tough decisions who created hrs. And maybe we'll realize bhw off a quick decision segitigaini ill always be true.
One more thing to remember .... in our society today:
something that really is not always popular
and something like is not always true ......
Postingan
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar