Guest Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 a rich man lost his wallet then he announced that whoever finds his wallet will be rewarded 1/3 of his money in the wallet. a begger found the wallet and returned it to the rich man. but when the rich man check his wallet, he realised that his diamond is missing, and accused the begger of theft, which the begger denied to After arguing with each other, they decided to consult a judge to help them. after listening to their story, what should the judge conclude a reasonable solution that is fair to both the rich man and the begger? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 that the begger gets 1/3 of the MONEY in the man's wallet. A diamond is not money...and was not found in the wallet, so the man is out of luck in his argument and the begger should get 1/3 of whatever MONEY is in the man's wallet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 (edited) i disagree i think the beggar should have to pay with the 1/3 of the money to replace the diamond Edited March 9, 2010 by BlueFlameFis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 that the begger gets 1/3 of the MONEY in the man's wallet. A diamond is not money...and was not found in the wallet, so the man is out of luck in his argument and the begger should get 1/3 of whatever MONEY is in the man's wallet. then it is not fair for the rich man as he lost profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 The problem here is that there is no proof of either the beggars claims or those of the man. Was there really a diamond in the wallet in the first place? How big was it, if there was? Did the beggar steal it or had it already gone missing? To my mind, the only definite evidence is the money in the wallet and the promise of a reward. In addition, why was the diamond not mentioned earlier? ThereforeThe beggar should have his reward and the rich man should keep his promise. Anyway, I'm sure he can afford it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 I wonder if this needs a bit of lateral thinking, as in the judgment of Solomon with the two mothers/child. The judge should ask the beggar to hand over something that means a lot to him, such as his child or parent, or tell him that his right hand is about to be chopped off for the theft (which of course wont happen). Now the judge needs to gauge the reactions of both parties. If the beggar is guilty of the theft, he would come clean at this point - better to lose a diamond than a member of your family/body part. However, if the beggar is innocent, he will have no choice but to follow the judge's order as he has no actual proof of his innocence. If the rich man is guilty of fabricating the diamond theft, he will feel too guilty to allow this to happen to the poor man and confess. Therefore, the judge will know what to decide based on the reactions of both parties. That's assuming everyone is moral enough to have these reactions! Or am I completely barking up the wrong tree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 The beggar is right and should be given 1/3 of whatever money found in the wallet. If he rally was a cheat he would not have revealed at all that he has the wallet and could have walked away with the full wallet. The owner of purse was bluffing to avoid payment of 1/3rd money and should be punished. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 9, 2010 Report Share Posted March 9, 2010 pretty chance of determining that beggar is on the truth side as there is no need to return the purse to rich man. He would have gone away with it. May be the rich man is cheating to avoid giving 1/3rd of the money as a reward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 12, 2010 Report Share Posted March 12, 2010 i disagree i think the beggar should have to pay with the 1/3 of the money to replace the diamond well what if he/ she didn't steal the diamond??????????????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 13, 2010 Report Share Posted March 13, 2010 (edited) shall i change the question to make everything simpler? what should the judge conclude to make everything fair? Edited March 13, 2010 by mangamathsfreak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 If the beggar had stolen the diamond, why return the wallet at all? If the beggar was dishonest he could keep the whole wallet for himself and get all the money instead of just 1/3. It is far more likely that the beggar is an honest man and the diamond was gone when he found the wallet. The judge should award the beggar the 1/3 reward for the return of the rich man's wallet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 If the beggar had stolen the diamond, why return the wallet at all? If the beggar was dishonest he could keep the whole wallet for himself and get all the money instead of just 1/3. It is far more likely that the beggar is an honest man and the diamond was gone when he found the wallet. The judge should award the beggar the 1/3 reward for the return of the rich man's wallet. and the rich man should just report a missing diamond with a reward if it's found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Posted March 16, 2010 Report Share Posted March 16, 2010 Judge will give that wallet to the beggar declaring that missing diamond in the wallet might not be owned to that rich man.. Sorry for my english... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
Guest
a rich man lost his wallet
then he announced that whoever finds his wallet will be rewarded 1/3 of his money in the wallet.
a begger found the wallet and returned it to the rich man.
but when the rich man check his wallet, he realised that his diamond is missing,
and accused the begger of theft, which the begger denied to
After arguing with each other, they decided to consult a judge to help them.
after listening to their story, what should the judge conclude a reasonable solution
that is fair to both the rich man and the begger?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
12 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.