I agree with your reasoning, assuming the husband did not hire the assassin (in which case I'd rank him top of the list), and the boatman did not know about the assassin (above lover if so since he could have helped her more directly).
TuxDave
Lifer
- Oct 8, 2002
- 10,571
- 3
- 71
Husband. I betcha he knew that she was unfaithful and set up a situation that will inevitably trick her to go to her lover's place across the river. He paid off the boatman not to let her back across and an assassin to kill her off on her way back from her affair. So he's the mastermind of it all.
Assassin. He was the one paid off to do the dirty work.
Boatman. He was also in on the deal.
Lover. He got tired of the girl and wanted an easy way to get rid of her and so by doing nothing he is able to accomplish what he wanted.
Wife. She's the innocent person being played by all of this.
How's that for creative thinking.
Assassin. He was the one paid off to do the dirty work.
Boatman. He was also in on the deal.
Lover. He got tired of the girl and wanted an easy way to get rid of her and so by doing nothing he is able to accomplish what he wanted.
Wife. She's the innocent person being played by all of this.
How's that for creative thinking.ok, so then now I'm saying the wife is at fault for her own death. She walked right into the killer knowing he was there trying to kill her.
the only difference is that instead of losing money she lost her life.
but I will say that legally the killer is at fault for the act.
It's just that on a moral basis the wife is the most to blame, followed closely by the killer.
I see where you are going with that but I just can't buy it. I say:
1. Assasin - he actually did the killing, without the assasin there is no crime for anyone to be responsible for.
2. Wife - The consequence for adultry should be divorce however in order to get home in time to avoid this consequence she knowingly risked a much larger consequence. She may have had other options that would not lead to her getting killed but would've led to her getting a divorce. She undertook an undue risk to avoid a fair consequence and did so knowingly.
3. Lover - He knew she would've been safe with the money and should have some motive to help her. He doesn't know for sure that she'll die if she doesn't get the money however his choice to not give the money does not mean the wife had to take the action she did.
4. Boatman - Being a neutral party he had the means to save her but not nearly the same motivation as the lover should have had.
5. Husband - Even if he knew she was cheating he, presumably by the story, didn't know her death would result.
1. The Assassin - He actually did the killing; who else could be #1?
2. The Wife - I mean, talk about setting yourself up for failure.
3. The Lover - You knew she was in trouble but left her assed out anyway.
4. The Boatman - He must hear all kinds of stuff, not surprised that he didn't take her.
5. The Husband - Assuming he didn't know there was an assassin, of course.
2. The Wife - I mean, talk about setting yourself up for failure.
3. The Lover - You knew she was in trouble but left her assed out anyway.
4. The Boatman - He must hear all kinds of stuff, not surprised that he didn't take her.
5. The Husband - Assuming he didn't know there was an assassin, of course.
Captante
Lifer
- Oct 20, 2003
- 30,342
- 10,860
- 136
(1) Husband - (Based on the assumption he hired the assassin)
(2) Assassin - (Did the actual killing)
(3) Wife - (Gave her husband motive by cheating)
(4) Lover - (Had the chance to save her but didn't)
(5) Boatman - (Not a very trusting fellow, but not responsible at all)
I could see swapping numbers 1 & 2 because as I said it was the assassin who actually did the deed, but although I agree that death isn't a fair or moral punishment for adultery, its certainly not an unreasonable consequence to anticipate with a jealous husband.
(2) Assassin - (Did the actual killing)
(3) Wife - (Gave her husband motive by cheating)
(4) Lover - (Had the chance to save her but didn't)
(5) Boatman - (Not a very trusting fellow, but not responsible at all)
I could see swapping numbers 1 & 2 because as I said it was the assassin who actually did the deed, but although I agree that death isn't a fair or moral punishment for adultery, its certainly not an unreasonable consequence to anticipate with a jealous husband.
If I make no assumptions and only answer based on the information I would answer:
(1) Assassin - He killed her.
(2) Lover - He was in a position to help her and though she was cheating, he should have done more to help.
(3) Wife - She is responsible for cheating, but she exhausted all of her options before crossing the bridge.
(4) Boatman - He had no reason to let her cross for free, and the situation doesn't say he knew about the assassin.
(5) Husband - He was away on business and had nothing to do with this.
I would say for the most part 4 & 5 are interchangable.
If I were to make assumptions:
First an assassin and a hitman aren't exactly the same thing. Assassins often kill for fanatical or politcal reasons. Hitmen are for hire.
Assuming the assassin is a hired hitman and the husband hired him, I would put it like this.
(1) Assassin - He still killed her. Forget doing his job, he could have stopped it even after being hired.
(2) Husband - You shouldn't hire people to kill other people
(3) Lover - He should have given money to help her get away safely
(4) Wife - She shouldn't have gone out that night.
(5) Boatman - He still didn't know anything.
If I assume the boatman knew about the hitman as well I'd put him at 4 and the wife at 5.
I don't think adultry is something to be taken lightly at all, but the wife is hardly the most responsible for her death.
(1) Assassin - He killed her.
(2) Lover - He was in a position to help her and though she was cheating, he should have done more to help.
(3) Wife - She is responsible for cheating, but she exhausted all of her options before crossing the bridge.
(4) Boatman - He had no reason to let her cross for free, and the situation doesn't say he knew about the assassin.
(5) Husband - He was away on business and had nothing to do with this.
I would say for the most part 4 & 5 are interchangable.
If I were to make assumptions:
First an assassin and a hitman aren't exactly the same thing. Assassins often kill for fanatical or politcal reasons. Hitmen are for hire.
Assuming the assassin is a hired hitman and the husband hired him, I would put it like this.
(1) Assassin - He still killed her. Forget doing his job, he could have stopped it even after being hired.
(2) Husband - You shouldn't hire people to kill other people
(3) Lover - He should have given money to help her get away safely
(4) Wife - She shouldn't have gone out that night.
(5) Boatman - He still didn't know anything.
If I assume the boatman knew about the hitman as well I'd put him at 4 and the wife at 5.
I don't think adultry is something to be taken lightly at all, but the wife is hardly the most responsible for her death.
yhelothar
Lifer
- Dec 11, 2002
- 18,409
- 39
- 91
I heard of this before. It's supposedly some kind of a psychological test. I don't remember the details, but it's something like if you rank the wife first, you value loyalty, the assassin, you value life, the boatman, you value money, the lover, you value lust, and the husband, you value companionship.
flexy
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2001
- 8,464
- 155
- 106
Originally posted by: gotsmack
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: gotsmack
interesting that you start questioning the morals of the wife FIRST (Which have NOTHING, again: NOTHING) to do with that she got killed.
And noone in this thread is actually asking about the morals of the killer
This reasoning is btw. about on the same level as saying that killing certain individuals is "morally" more legitim over others - eg. the same logic Hitler had when he killed jews, since they were considered "under-humans" and therefore it would not be as "moralic bad" to kill them.
"she deserved it" or "its her own fault fo cheating" i can only see as an extreme immature answer of someone under 12 years old....
As said there are some things not clear, eg. why she didnt stay at the lover's knowing the assassing was waiting on the bridge - but what if (for whatever reason) she did NOT have a choice ? [for the sake of the story i assume just she had to be back and the bridge was the only way]
#1 is the wife, no matter what arguments are made.
People are trying to say the assassin is #1, but who has the control and hence the most responsibility here? The wife..
She could have stayed home, she could have stayed at the lovers house and called her husband to come get her with money.
Her death keeps leading back to her choice to risk death.... if she didntk now about the assassin i would put him above her, but she knew, and went anyway
People are trying to say the assassin is #1, but who has the control and hence the most responsibility here? The wife..
She could have stayed home, she could have stayed at the lovers house and called her husband to come get her with money.
Her death keeps leading back to her choice to risk death.... if she didntk now about the assassin i would put him above her, but she knew, and went anyway
flexy
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2001
- 8,464
- 155
- 106
>>>
2. Wife - The consequence for adultry should be divorce however in order to get home in time to avoid this consequence she knowingly risked a much larger consequence. She may have had other options that would not lead to her getting killed but would've led to her getting a divorce. She undertook an undue risk to avoid a fair consequence and did so knowingly.
>>>
funny...i actually assumed the husband already KNEW...because she told the husband in advance she WILL be unfaithful. So..i didnt even consider she needs to rush home to conceal her doings.
i am stil standing by my order that 1) the assassin is responsible
and of course everyone who KNEW about the situation, which puts lover on 2) because he knew about the whole situation, the wife even asked him for help..and he refused...basically "passively" let the murder happen by not providing help which he could've easily done.
2. Wife - The consequence for adultry should be divorce however in order to get home in time to avoid this consequence she knowingly risked a much larger consequence. She may have had other options that would not lead to her getting killed but would've led to her getting a divorce. She undertook an undue risk to avoid a fair consequence and did so knowingly.
>>>
funny...i actually assumed the husband already KNEW...because she told the husband in advance she WILL be unfaithful. So..i didnt even consider she needs to rush home to conceal her doings.
i am stil standing by my order that 1) the assassin is responsible
and of course everyone who KNEW about the situation, which puts lover on 2) because he knew about the whole situation, the wife even asked him for help..and he refused...basically "passively" let the murder happen by not providing help which he could've easily done.
Originally posted by: flexy
interesting that you start questioning the morals of the wife FIRST (Which have NOTHING, again: NOTHING) to do with that she got killed.
And noone in this thread is actually asking about the morals of the killer
This reasoning is btw. about on the same level as saying that killing certain individuals is "morally" more legitim over others - eg. the same logic Hitler had when he killed jews, since they were considered "under-humans" and therefore it would not be as "moralic bad" to kill them.
"she deserved it" or "its her own fault fo cheating" i can only see as an extreme immature answer of someone under 12 years old....
As said there are some things not clear, eg. why she didnt stay at the lover's knowing the assassing was waiting on the bridge - but what if (for whatever reason) she did NOT have a choice ? [for the sake of the story i assume just she had to be back and the bridge was the only way]
You misunderstand me, I don;t even care that che cheated. I'm not talking about morals in terms of marital fidelity, but moral fault in terms of risk taking. If you risk your life, don't cry when you lose.
so I'm saying that it is not immoral to take risks, but it would be to blame others when the outcome is not in your favor.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter