"Whose fault is it?" -- an open-ended riddle

H

Hildegarda

Guest
I have come across this riddle on the internet. It's one of those that have no "correct" answer. But all the answers people gave seemed very telling, as they provided a peek at a person's opinions (or assumptions) about life, responsibility, guilt, freedom of choice etc. I wonder what you guys think.

Here is the riddle:

************

Mary and her Husband live on one side of the river, and Mary's Lover lives on the other side. Every day, while her Husband is at work, Mary crosses the river over the bridge, to visit her Lover.

One day, the Lover says to her, "that's it, we are through, I break up with you". Mary goes back to bridge, but sees the Killer there and flees back to the Lover, asking him for help. But he says, "didn't you understand? It's over, I don't care, leave now." Then, Mary follows the river bank, see the Ferryman and asks him to take her across the river. "Ten bucks", says the ferrymen. "But I have no money!", says Mary. "No money, no ride", says the Ferryman. "But the Killer is after me, help me!", says Mary. "Too bad", says the Ferryman. "No money, no ride".

So Mary goes back, meets the Killer by the bridge, and the Killer kills her.

************

Whose fault is it (that Mary has died)? Rank all five characters in the descending order, #1 being the most at fault, #5 being one with little to no fault. Don't forget any of the characters; no ties are allowed. Give your reasoning if you can (this, I think, is the most interesting part).
 
#1 The psychopathic leaders who degraded society to make emotionally dead individuals and promote psychopaths and psychopathic behavior.
 
I would say that the killer is the main fault that killed her, because, thats what the killer did.
The rest of the persons in the story, was psychopaths, and the lover-man act of saying " It's over, I don't care, leave now.",
only suggests that his view of Mary was as an object, a "thing". Like, did that guy totally reveal his true nature there....
 
#1. The Killer. Because that's what he did.
#2. The Ferryman. He could have saved her but for 10 bucks.
#3. The Lover. Similar to the Ferryman. Actually, #2 and #3 are almost at the same level. Both are psychopaths. But I think the Lover is closer to the Killer so is in more immediate danger, which might affect his calculation.
#4. Mary. She could have fled further down the river bank instead of coming back to the Killer. Also her fault was in not seeing the Lover for the psychopath he was.
#5. The Husband was not related so I put him last. His only fault in Mary's death might be in not seeing that a killer was in the neighbourhood and taking measures to protect his family. But then, if he was so observant, he wouldn't have been fooled by Mary for so long.
 
... though I would ad, the husband is not indicated to act psycopathic, so did not meant include him to all. But would not be suprised if he turns out to be the killer, ;)
 
I'd say it's no one's fault. That's life and free will plays a role, osit. :flowers:
 
I say no one was at 'fault', but it appears to have been Marry's choice, as far as she was able to choose. Learning is fun after all!

So Mary goes back, meets the Killer by the bridge, and the Killer kills her.
Click to expand...

In that situation (it seems very unrealistic), I can come up with atleast a hundred alternative courses of action. Especially having identified a 'Killer'.

Ok....on that note, I say that it was her upbringing and the penorised sociaty that installed a fatalistic program in her, that she mechanically followed to her own death.
The penorised machines around her just assisted her program in running.
A machine is as a machine does. No one was at 'fault'

Having read that a few times I find myself wondering what sort of person wrote this 'scenario'.....theres a lot of pathology in it. I choose not to answer it how it 'says' I should :P
 
It's Mary's fault. The assumption that it was okay to have a lover is implicit in the text, it seems, and that is where the whole thing went south.

Oh, certainly, you can go backward and blame the ponerized society for Mary thinking it was okay to have a lover and deceive her husband, but the fact is, in any ponerized society, individuals can meet the challenges of conscience.

Additionally, Mary is the one who made the bad choice in a husband, and a similarly bad choice in picking a lover.

Or, perhaps her husband was a decent guy and she married him for his money and just needed excitement and that is why she took a lover.

Second would be her husband... assuming he was a lout and she was a very unhappy woman who could not get out of her marriage. If he made her life so miserable that she felt that taking a lover was the only solution... If he wasn't a lout, if Mary was just a cheater and liar, then he was at fault for marrying her and putting her into the situation where she felt she had to take a lover to survive in her marriage.

Third would be the lover for being another conscienceless, abusive male willing to a)participate in illicit activity; b) willing to take advantage of an abused woman (or both).

Fourth would be the Ferryman - again, for being a conscienceless, abusive male unwilling to help a woman in distress.

Last would be the killer. You don't know that the killer was a person - it could have been a crocodile. Whichever, it was defined as a "killer" and killers do what they do because that is what they are; killers, defined as such, are forces of nature. If Mary died in a tornado, would you blame the tornado?

In a sense, all the aspects of the problem are like "forces of nature" which leaves Mary still at fault for being asleep.
 
It's the moon's fault ;)

Ouspensky said:
Man, like every other living being, cannot, in the ordinary conditions of life, tear himself free from the moon. All his movements and consequently all his actions are controlled by the moon. If he kills another man, the moon does it; if he sacrifices himself for others, the moon does that also. All evil deeds, all crimes, all self-sacrificing actions, all heroic exploits, as well as all the actions of ordinary everyday life, are controlled by the moon.
Click to expand...
 
I would have put Mary in the 1st position. She was supposed to be responsible for her choices, it's her choices that led her in this trap. She was not honest with her husband. If she was unhappy in her marriage, had she been more awake, honest and responsible, she would have broken up with her husband.
Then I would have put the lover (who played the game), the killer, the ferryman (who refused to help her even though she was in danger) and the husband (assuming he was an honest man and did what he could to make her happy - which is not explicit in this riddle).
I like Laura's explanation - the killer may be a force of nature and in this case he's not responsible at all. It's just what he is.
 
I'd say it Toxoplasma gondii fault as it makes men more antisocial & women more promiscuous. ;)
 
I'd say it's first of all, all Mary's fault. She seems to be the central character in the story, around whom everything happens. So, as the director of her life's film, she made some bad script writing and casting choices.

:cool2:
 
Not enough data for determination. For example one scenario:

1) Mary – depends - intentionally hides lover from husband? did she discuss her discontent with her husband?. :thdown:
2 or 3) Lover - depends - did he know she was married? If yes put him at #2, if he didn't know put him at #3 for being heartless. :shock:
3 or 2) The Killer - "the" killer, does using the word "the" means he was waiting for her with aggravated intentions. :ninja:
4) The Ferrryman – he’s just a cheap b@stard :boat:
5) Husband - was she just a good liar with husband having no clue of deceit or could his ignorance be intentional moving him up in these rankings? :rolleyes:

Then again
MEG said:
I'd say it's no one's fault. That's life and free will plays a role, osit.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom