Resolutionr 8

The final solution for this time is to give me the whole feeling of two words - "unusual".

The strange thing is that everyone seems to know the rules, the process, the circumstances that may be on the ground, and their role.

For example, after the 11th resolutioner said something, it was said, "I know what you want to do and whether you want to establish the rules", and the 11th resolutioner replied, "No, and the rules will never be established". While I know myself that this probability is true, this firm, light-winded mentality has caused me to be so restless throughout the scene that I do not want to talk.

A similar scene was that of candidate 2, who was laughing at the scene and "opposed" at the judges' table, but there were people who said, "I think that candidate 2 is real and very deliberate." (I can't remember.)

The same is true of candidates 1, 3 and 4, to varying degrees, but of the same nature.

Number 1 says, "Don't feel selfless because I'm a volunteer. I think all altruistic behaviour is motivated by self-interest

No. 3, it's not fascism, it's not Frankenstein that I'm advocating.....and what I'm saying next may make some people hate me very much, but may also make others my loyalties.

No. 4 until it's gone, there seems to be nothing left of the scene.

On the other side of the candidates, the judges have been talking about "self" and "later" and "social Darwinism" (which I myself proposed, I thought about), and I don't really understand what's going on.

It seems that everyone pulls something into their head and wants to express some sort of "emotional" or some kind of "ideology" rather than a specific, real, possible thing, a living person.

I asked the Chair a question: does the candidate's profession influence your judgment? The answer was no (it was not known whether there were any cases where the candidate ' s career had been taken into account but not said). A person's age, occupation, survival skills, available resources must be itemized.

In the abstract, it's to what extent it can be "alt" and quantifiable. For this final solution, the obvious advantage of the four candidates is that candidate number two - a young and productive chemist, who is doing research that is likely to affect the lives of millions. At the scene, I voted for her, but not on that basis.

Watching that this is not "social Darwinism" or a debate about whether to save one or five people" and whether a talented scientist is worth living more than 10 ordinary people. This is a result-oriented discussion of a living person, a specific thing.

Theories are gray, and life is green.

And then I looked back at my own live reaction, and I got stuck in the mindless "think first" circle, and I said it in my mouth.

NE0401162106050151

Backstage is responding to 210605.