#616 Questions 23 to 26

03/25/06

Continuing with questions from The Book of Questions, by Gregory Stock, Ph.D., Workman Publishing Company, Inc., $6.95. (If you like the idea, you should buy the book. Get yourself all the questions at once.)

23. While on a trip to another city, your spouse (or lover) meets and spends a night with an exciting stranger. Given that they will never meet again, and that you will not otherwise learn of the incident, would you want your partner to tell you about it? If roles were reversed, would you reveal what you had done?
I hate this question. I wish things were always so minor. Go away.

24. Are there people you envy enough to want to trade places with them? Who are they?
Well, I envy rich folks with all kinds of household help and the way always smoothed for them. And folks with lots of friends and involvements. And folks with large close happy families. But I'm not sure I'd want to trade places with them, because all that nice stuff comes with responsibilities and requirements and compromises that I'm not sure I want, not sure I could handle. I feel like all that nice stuff requires that I give up some of myself, and I am very self-protective. I guess it's because the way my life has gone thus far, the tradeoffs haven't seemed worth it. Disfunctional family, bad choices in friends, whatever. All I want is love and peace and quiet.

25. For an all-expense-paid, one-week vacation anywhere in the world, would you be willing to kill a beautiful butterfly by pulling off its wings? What about stepping on a cockroach?
Why the implied difference? Is a butterfly more valuable than a cockroach? Is beauty valid criteria? If so, should we apply that criteria to people, too? Is pulling off wings worse than stepping on? (Well, maybe. I'll give you that one. Torture, and all.) What's really weird is that if the cockroach were running across my kitchen floor I wouldn't hesitate to stomp on it, for free. But if someone put a captive roach in front of me and said stomp on this and get money, then I'd hesitate. Like the first cockroach is "guilty", and the second is "innocent". Weird, huh? But, in the end, I'd probably do both. To poor innocent insects. And I'd hate myself, and spend the rest of my life trying to make it up to bugs. Well, a while, anyway.

26. Would you be able to murder an innocent person if it would end hunger in the world?
Ho. So if I'd kill a bug for a vacation, would I kill a person for the world? First I'd have to decide whether ending hunger in the world is such a good idea. That's an even bigger question, a tougher question, than the one posed. Starvation is a natural population control. Even if you could redistribute populations by moving folks from overcrowded areas to wilderness areas, with adequate food supplies after a while the wilderness areas would start getting overcrowded. There would then have to be an increase in war or disease, otherwise the Earth itself dies. The alternate way to really end hunger in the world would be to kill all the excess people who live in areas that can't support them. So the way I see it, killing one person to end hunger would have to eventually result in the deaths of many more people, most of whom didn't contribute to the problem - "innocents", too. And probably even more of them than now die of starvation. Nah. I'd pass. But not for the reason you expected.