Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!sophie
From: sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy,net.flame
Subject: Re: Re: life rafts
Message-ID: <503@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 2-May-85 09:38:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: mnetor.503
Posted: Thu May  2 09:38:52 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 2-May-85 11:19:01 EDT
References: <1216@amd.UUCP> <5232@fortune.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 17
Xref: utcs net.philosophy:1678 net.flame:9296

> In article <1216@amd.UUCP> karen@amd.UUCP (Karen Bain) writes:
> >
> >I think the best way to handle this raft situation is survival of
> >the fittest. Whoever dies of starvation first gets eaten by the 
> >other. It only seems fair - this way no one feels guilty about
> >killing anyone, and by the time one of the people starves to death,
> >the other will have sufficient appitite to eat him.
> >
> >                               - K.B.
Another solution is the one proposed in Voltaire's Candide: A group of people
were assieged in a fortress without any food.  So, all the women "donated"
one of their buttocks to the cause and nobody died.  I guess that's a nice
"cooperative" solution to the problem :-).   I can't remember whether the men
donated anything and if they did, what it was.
-- 
Sophie Quigley
{allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie