> I thought it might be fun to critique this as if it really were a test.
> A man (M) and a lady (L) who are very much in love, and devoted to one
> another are separated by a river with no way of getting across to the other
> side.
>
> On L's side of the river, there is a boatman (B) who is able to take her
> over to the other side of the river but refuses to do so unless she pays him
> a price of $20, twice his normal fare.
>
> L has no money.
>
> Another man (S) then tells L that he will giver her $20 if she sleeps with
> him.
>
> L agrees to do so and on receiving the $20,pays B who takes her over to the
> other side of the river.
>
> She is reunited with M and they are very happy together.
>
> However, a friend of M (F) finds out what L did with S and immediately tells
> M.
>
> On learning the news, M finds L and ends things with her, stating that he
> wants nothing more to do with her.
>
> Your task is to rank these five people, M, L, B, S, and F, from best to
> worst. i.e. best person to worst person.
>
>
1) L -- She did what she "had to do" in a male dominated world, but she
retained her discretion regarding who should "did it" with.
2) S -- He is simply responding to an opportunity. One might say that S
is "helping L out" of her dilemma by providing L's preferred exchange
under the circumstances.
3) F -- S/he violated the norms of friendship for her own selfish
purposes.
4) M -- He partipated, apparently naively, in an encounter with L
without paying attention to what it cost L. His lack of forsight and
sensitivity to the problems of others was bad enough. That he would
reject L for doing what she "had to do" simply suggest that M was
interested in L primarily for what he could get off her, literally.
5) B -- He used his privileged position and circumstance to demand more
than a reasonable profit for his services. (I presume he was hoping
to get "serviced" for his efforts, too, but he discovered he wasn't
the only fish in the sea.) B is the most culpable *individual*
because he knowingly took advantage of a disadvantaged other and,
thereby, created a series of negatively valued choices to be made
that would not otherwise have to have been made.
> The order which you've ranked the five people is supposed to represent the
> importance that you place on different things in your life.
>
> 1 being the most important, and 5 being the least.
>
> The letters stand for:
>
> M-morality
> S-sex
> L-love
> B-business (or work)
> F-friends
I think the test has some validity in distinguishing some values (or some
different ways of thinking about moralities). The complexity of making
sense of another person's thinking -- especially if s/he does not provide
the rationale for the ranking as I have done above -- makes me cautious
about the reliability and validity of interpretations that might be
applied to different orderings.
Bob