I really don't know what to say. Obviously, I know that to have a chicken, that chicken must hatch out of an egg. However, to have an egg, you must have a chicken, because eggs come from chickens. I have also come up with an alternate solution. Actually, I don't remember whether I came up with it or if I heard it from somewhere. I heard that the chicken has evolved from dinosaurs, which may not be all that impossible. So maybe the solution is that the chicken came first, but it actually evolved from a different species??
For this one, I think there are a lot of people questioning my mentality right now. However, I found this question on the internet and I am severely swayed by this. Can vegetables feel the pain when we dice them for meals? We know that animals can feel pain, just like humans can. Is that a different story for plants? I mean, if they can't scream, that might be solely due to the fact that they do not have any mouths, or at least not any visible ones.
Ok. This one never really made sense to me. Umm. I guess science can prove that the tree made noise, obviously, because we can see that when there are people there to hear the noise that the tree makes when it falls down, you can hear it. What evidence is there to suggest that the same does not happen for when people aren't around to hear it? Then again, we cannot ever guarantee if it doesn't make noise because no one would be there to hear it! So, all in all, I think it all comes down to which side can present their argument best, and I agree with the side that says it actually did make noise.
I think that emotions are mostly irrational, but there are some emotions that are rational. Like emotions like anger and sadness aren't usually thought out and planned strategically. Also, I can't really think of any rational emotions, so I think that emotions are mostly, if not fully irrational.
To this, I say: "Obviously." At least in my world. I think the correct question is not if there are human rights, but what are they? I think that every human has the right to education, safety, bodily autonomy, and basic human needs (food, water, shelter, etc.) However, most of these rights are violated or not acknowledged in the world. Sadly.
This is a very hard question to give an answer to. Either way, I think at least 1 person will die in this scenario. I would probably, however, help the 4 patients first because they have the greater chance of surviving. The one person will probably die and if you spend that precious time curing them when you could've spent time curing the 4 people, 4 people will die, maybe even 5. I think, in this situation, the "greater good" principle must be applied.