Today I shall post about 大道理 (philosophy which usually turned into crap through my mouth). Was watching 財神客棧 (Treasure Inn) and came across with the below theory.

恻隐之心，人皆有之；
羞恶之心，人皆有之；
恭敬之心，人皆有之；
是非之心，人皆有之。

Empathy and Pity;
Ashamed and Disgusted;
Admiration and Referent;
Right and Wrong;
are common to men, are inevitable.

恻隐之心，仁也；
羞恶之心，义也；
恭敬之心，礼也；
是非之心，智也。

As such,
We do have Benevolence;
We do have Righteousness;
We do have Respect;
We do have Wisdom.

This leads me to a video I watched long time ago, the speaker gave us a scenario: You were in a lost control trolley in a mine, and you see that 5 workers are ahead of your tracks, and the only thing you could do is to divert into a side track which would kill 1 worker there instead, what would you do? Though my choice would be that I would do nothing, but majority would choose the alternative. The reason being of my stand, is because that the default is the 5 workers, and it's rather unfair if I were to play their fate, what was going to happen bound to happen, like Final Destination series.

Anyway, well then the speaker changed the scenario, to: Imagine you're now an onlooker, and there's a man beside you, that if you push him down, the track would be sort of stuck and so on, such that he would die, sparring the 5, would you? Majority now would say they wouldn't, so do I. This is obvious, this would be like murder, so nope noone the the right mind would do it, the difference between the 2 scenarios, being that one is you directly push the man, and the other is that you have no choice, because it is more 'right' to save 5 for 1, you got to divert the trolley, so indirectly, it is the trolley that killed the man.

Then he gave the scenario a different place and context, now in a hospital.

You're a doctor in emergency room, where 5 patients suffered moderate injuries and 1 severe injury, restoring either one group would kill the other. What would you do? Majority chose to forsake the 1 for the 5.

Again he modified the scenario, now: You're a transplant surgeon, dealing with 5 desperate patient with 5 different organs in need, then one healthy patient came to check up in next room, taking a nap. What would you do? Again same as the second scenario, most would leave it to fate, they will leave the healthy untouched. None would do it. However, one cheeky and intelligent audience suggested to use the first patient of the 5 that couldn't hang on anymore longer to save the other 4. Smart!

So here, we have 2 different types of morality. One being Consequentialist (Utilitarian, Jeremy Bentham), that 5 should live even 1 have to die, because we locate morality in the consequences of act. Yet people felt wrong to pull in innocent man, so this is the irony. So we do thing that sometimes, like the 2nd modification of the above 2 scenarios, we feel that it is just wrong to kill an innocent for the sake of more people, so what we have next is the Categorical (Emmanuel Kant), where we locate morality in certain duties and rights, regardless of consequences. We, categorically, thinks that there is a certain rightness or wrongness in the act itself, such as sociologist loved to say, that deviant acts is only deemed deviant in certain context, place and time.

Anyway, for vocab: Qarah moment - the moment and chance that allowed anything to fall in place. By person, context, place and time.

Ecclesiastes 9:11 (NKJV)
11 I returned and saw under the sun that-- The race is not to the swift, Nor the battle to the strong, Nor bread to the wise, Nor riches to men of understanding, Nor favor to men of skill; But time and chance happen to them all.

The word “Happen” found in this verse is the Hebrew word, “Qarah”.

Qarah means to encounter, meet, befall, happen, and/or to come to meet.

So “Qarah Moments” are directed by God as divinely interrupted moments in one’s life. Where God is directing our steps & purposefully causing certain events, places, and people to cross our path.