If you cannot attend our meeting it is important for catering purposes to let us know.
Please call Clive on 5562 2967 (H) or 5562 5852 (W) or ‘reply’ to this Central Spoke email.It is important that you let us know before 4.30pm on the Tuesday before the meeting.
Late apologies should be communicated directly to the venue; Central Court Motel 5562 8555
In lieu of Lew.
Hi all
Following on from our last catch up a couple of months ago, I have made a tentative booking at the Last Coach again for 5.30ish on Thursday, 1st November, 2018 for drinks and a catch up and a meal for anyone who wants to stay on?
It appeared to work well last time with about 16 turning up and a few staying on for a meal. There were a lot of people away back in July/August so hopefully those that missed out last time, can make it this time?
We then need to discuss Xmas break up? Any suggestions greatly appreciated?
I am still missing a few emails so please spread the word to other Central Rotary other halves and if you do find anyone who has been missed, let me know so I can add them to the list!!
I will forward this to the Bulletin editor too so the members can perhaps let their wives/girlfriends/lovers know about the event?
Look forward to hearing from you all.
Cheers
Di Officer
The Four Way Test.
Is it fair to all concerned? Will it be beneficial to all concerned? Part II.
Last week we discussed how restrictive these tests would be if we applied them. Most people accept that a project has merit if it produces a benefit for most people, even if a small number of people are disadvantaged by it. However, this is an area of ethics fraught with difficulty.
If you had a choice between saving the life of five people or saving the lives of one, most people would save the five lives, right?
Imagine five people waiting for donor organs; two waiting for kidneys, one for a liver, one for a heart and one for lungs. By a strange coincidence a person is identified as the only match for all five people. Most people would consider the murder of the potential donor to save the lives of the others completely unethical, and yet choosing not to murder the potential donor would result in the deaths of five people.
In a famous psychology experiment, people are presented with two scenarios. In one scenario there is a train travelling towards five people stuck on the track. You are next to a switch which could divert the train to a side track where one man is stuck. Would you pull the lever and divert the train to save five people at the expense of the life of the other man? In the second scenario the train is travelling towards five people stuck on the track. This time you are on a bridge over the track and the man is standing on the hand rail of the bridge. If you push him off the bridge into the path of the train he will die, but the train will stop and the five people will be saved. Most people would pull the lever and divert the train, but most people would not push the man off the bridge, even though the practical outcomes in each scenario are the same.
These two tests appear so restrictive that, if we were to apply them, we would have to abandon many of Rotary’s best projects. Should we just ignore them? Should we attempt to rewrite these tests? If we do rewrite them, how could we codify this complex, nuanced area of ethics? What do you think?
Boré’s view.
Janick has been having a crack at Aussie rules.Up until now, the most Danish man to have ever played AFL is Tom Boyd, whose mother is Danish.Could the super-fit Janick be the first fully Danish man to play AFL?Unfortunately though, footy season is over now, which may be a relief to Janick’s parents.Now he can go back to playing a civilised sport, like European handball for example.
We thank Boré again for another great cartoon.
The Four Way Test.
This week we conclude our 'ethics 101' style look at the Rotary Four Way Test.
Is it fair to all concerned? Will it be beneficial to all concerned? Part II.
Last week we discussed how restrictive these tests would be if we applied them. Most people accept that a project has merit if it produces a benefit for most people, even if a small number of people are disadvantaged by it. However, this is an area of ethics fraught with difficulty.
If you had a choice between saving the life of five people or saving the lives of one, most people would save the five lives, right?
Imagine five people waiting for donor organs; two waiting for kidneys, one for a liver, one for a heart and one for lungs. By a strange coincidence a person is identified as the only match for all five people. Most people would consider the murder of the potential donor to save the lives of the others completely unethical, and yet choosing not to murder the potential donor would result in the deaths of five people.
In a famous psychology experiment, people are presented with two scenarios. In one scenario there is a train travelling towards five people stuck on the track. You are next to a switch which could divert the train to a side track where one man is stuck. Would you pull the lever and divert the train to save five people at the expense of the life of the other man? In the second scenario the train is travelling towards five people stuck on the track. This time you are on a bridge over the track and the man is standing on the hand rail of the bridge. If you push him off the bridge into the path of the train he will die, but the train will stop and the five people will be saved. Most people would pull the lever and divert the train, but most people would not push the man off the bridge, even though the practical outcomes in each scenario are the same.
Even if we accept that these tests are overly restrictive, how can we rewrite them to codify this complex, nuanced area of ethics? What do you think?
Fast Facts
How to Travel from Copenhagen to Paris
Most people travelling between Copenhagen and Paris get to their destination by plane, train, bus, or car. There are five main options, with travel times (excluding connections) and approximate costs in Australian Dollars, as follows:
Fly to Paris CDG 4 h 53 min $92 - $331
Fly to Paris Orly 4 h 46 min $105 - $494
Train 13 h 30 min $307 - $542 via three trains:
København (Copenhagen) to Hamburg Hauptbhanhof (Hbf)
