Philosophy

Name:

Course:

Institution:

Instructor:

Date:

Philosophy

The first component in the case of building a highway to reduce the traffic congestion is the residents within the affluent residential area through which the highway is designed to go. This people will be affected by the highway since it means having increased traffic to the residential area. This has several implications to the residents, which are both negative and positive. The county treasurer is the second component, since he complains of the revenue that will be lost after building the highway through the affluent residential area. This will decrease the value of the property within the area, reducing the county’s revenues in general. To start working on the problem in this scenario, several questions would be needed for each component in order to gather enough information for solving the problem. To the people within the affluent residents, one of the questions would be why they would not want to have the highway passing through their neighborhood (Kirby & Goodpaster, 2007). The second question would be about the problems that might arise if the highway passed through their area. Finally, I would ask where they would prefer having high traffic within the central business district area to having the high traffic within their residence. Finally, to gather more information for solving the problem I would ask the county treasurer what would be the lost value of having the highway going through this area, and the value of the highway, for comparison. In addition, as the County Planning Commission, I would ask myself what would be the value of the highway to the people. The second question would concern what issues within the county I will be solving by having the highway go through the affluent residential area, and whether the designing team exploited all the alternatives before deciding on this one. If I would need more information, I would get it through environmentalists from inquiring about the implications of building the highway since the residents are more concerned with the pollution. More so, to gather information about the value of the highway, I would consult the major businesses about diverting the traffic to the residential area. I would inquire whether there is any benefit to the businesses around this town.

Both Mr. Brown and Mr. Green argue that their horses are slower than the others are. They have tried to prove this through highlighting the number of races each has won. However, this does not prove which horse is slower. The main problem in this case is how this could be proven since the issue is about the slowest. Normally, a horse race is meant to prove the fastest horse. In this case, it is about proving the slowest. In a race, one could always ride a horse slower than the others to prove it is the slowest. Therefore, having them race with their horses would not prove. However, proving that their horse is slower is the same as proving that the other person’s horse is faster. Therefore, in a race to prove the faster horse would be possible if only each of the two men rode the other’s horse. Since each would want to prove that their horse is slower, each would want to prove that the other horse is faster, which is the essence of a race. Thus, with each riding the other person’s horse, they would both push the horses to their optimal performance. This would prove the faster horse; thus, proving the slowest horse. The reason this method solves the solution is that each man would work hard to have the other person’s horse race faster. Normally, in a race, a rider would want to prove their horse is the fastest (ARISE Foundation, 2011). In this case, the riders want to prove the other horse as faster than their’s. Therefore, the only solution is swapping the rider; so that each rider will ride the horse, that each would want to prove faster. This would in turn prove the slowest horse. This is similar to my own scenario, where John and Peter who had the same car model but each argued that their car was slower than the other car. For some time, they argued about it with both trying to prove, they had the slower car. This scenario is similar to the case of Mr. Brown and Mr. Green. The same solution can be used where each can drive the other person’s car. This way, each would drive the other person’s car faster.

References

ARISE Foundation. (2011). Life Skills Curriculum: ARISE Rules of the Road (Instructor’s Manual). Ney York, N.Y: ARISE Foundation

Kirby, G.R. & Goodpaster, J.R, (2007). Thinking, 4/E. Ney York, N.Y: Pearson.

Copyright 2018 - Coaching WordPress Theme.