Philippine Normal University

The National Center for Teacher Education

The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

The Lord of the Rings

Bilbo Baggins throws a party for himself and his protégé, Frodo. At the party, Bilbo announces that he is
leaving his home to his heir, Frodo. He returns home and is met by his close friend, the wizard Gandalf.
Gandalf insists that Bilbo remove the Ring that he has owned since the events of the previous adventure,
chronicled in The Hobbit, and give the ring to his young heir. The Ring has special powers, the most obvious of
which is to make the wearer invisible. Then Bilbo disappears.

For many years Frodo lives in Bilbo’s home at Bag End. Just like Bilbo, Frodo appears not to be aged. In his
fifties, he grows restless. One day Gandalf comes to Frodo and tells him that he is in danger. It seems that the
Ring originally belonged to Sauron, the Dark Lord. Sauron wants the Ring back so that he can conquer the
world. Sauron is using Gollum, an evil hobbit who also wants the Ring, to find out who has it and where it can
be located. Gandalf tells Frodo that the ring is a corrupting power, and that anyone who uses it will ultimately
be destroyed by it if they do not part with it. Further, he tells Frodo that the Ring can only be destroyed by
tossing it into a volcano at Mount Orodruin. Frodo tries to give the ring to Gandalf, but the wizard tells him
that he (Frodo) was chosen to bear the responsibility; it is his fate.

It is decided that Frodo will take the ring to the Crack of Doom in Mount Orodruin. He is to be accompanied by
his friends Sam, Merry, and Pippin. As they travel, the Black Riders of Sauron pursue them. The Black Riders
are bodiless horsemen who want the Ring. The travelers meet up with Aragorn, a friend of Gandalf, and
together they continue their journey with the aid of some new companions.

Gandalf leads the companions through the mines of Moria. Gandalf battles a dreadful spirit and falls into an
abyss. Aragorn becomes the leader. After many small battles, the company realizes their task will be very
difficult. They meet Lady Galadriel, of the elves, and are given some assistance. Boromir, a representative from
Gondor, tries to persuade Frodo to give him the Ring to take to his father and thus defeat their enemies. Frodo
refuses and the two men fight. Frodo must use the Ring to escape Boromir. Boromir is instantly sorry he has
been overcome by the allure of power. Frodo decides to travel alone, fearful of the consequences of his
friends being corrupted. Only faithful Sam is allowed to accompany him.

Boromir is killed and given a hero’s burial; everyone knows he never meant to fight Frodo. They attribute his
sudden corruption to the Ring. Orcs attack and Merry and Pippin are taken captive. Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas
pursue them, trying to save their companions. The riders of Rohan appear, having been summoned to help.
They destroy the orcs near Fangorn forest but cannot find Merry and Pippin. Merry and Pippin have come into
the area inhabited by Treebeard the Ent. He is the oldest living thing in the forest. He sustains them and rouses
his troops to avenge the hobbits.

Meanwhile, Gandalf has come back from death as Gandalf the White. He approaches Aragorn, Gimli, and
Legolas and tells them what has happened to him. He introduces them to King Theoden of Edoras. Together
Gandalf and his men join Theoden in fighting the orcs and looking for Merry and Pippin. Along the way they
defeat Saruman, who has been causing trouble and impeding Frodo in his quest.

Sam and Frodo are still making their way to the Crack of Doom. Gollum, who still craves the Ring, follows
them. They capture Gollum and try to persuade him to forsake his evil and return to his old likable self as the
character Smeagol. The three make their way through the forest until they are met by an army from Gondor,
led by Faramir (Boromir’s brother).

When Faramir releases them, Gollum leads Sam and Frodo into a trap--the lair of the giant spider Shelob.
Frodo is wounded so badly that Sam fears he is dead. Gollum disappears. Sam decides to take the Ring and
continue on in order to destroy it and fulfil Frodo’s responsibility. Orcs come along and steal Frodo’s lifeless
body. By listening to the orcs, Sam discovers that Frodo is not dead but is merely drugged. He pursues them to
save his good friend.

Gandalf and Pippin arrive in Gondor, where they meet Denethor (Boromir and Faramir’s father). Pippin is
befriended by Beregond. Aragorn has revealed himself to Sauron and decides to travel ahead through the
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

Paths of the Dead in order to reach Sauron quickly and thereby assist Frodo and Sam. Eowyn, niece of
Theoden, begs to be taken along but Aragorn refuses. He goes to the Paths of the Dead and offers the dead
peace if they will fulfill their promise to fight against Sauron.

Merry is not allowed to accompany Theoden into battle, but the resourceful young hobbit hitches a ride with a
fierce young soldier named Dernhelm.

Theoden, meanwhile, receives an urgent message to help Denethor at Minas Tirith. He refuses to let Merry
join him, but Merry is offered a ride by a young rider named Dernhelm. Denethor is displeased with his
younger son Faramir for having helped the Ring bearer rather than claiming the Ring for Gondor. He sends his
son into battle, and when Faramir is seriously wounded, his repentant father goes mad with grief. He tries to
set himself and his son’s body on fire.

The story continues with the ride of the Rohirrim, allies of Gondor. They are attacked by Nazguls. Theoden falls
beneath his wounded horse, but the young rider Dernhelm reveals himself as the fir Eowyn and kills the Lord
of the Nazguls. Aragorn, meanwhile, rides into Gondor with the help of the forces of the dead and Sauron’s
evil minions are defeated.

Gandalf removes Faramir from the funeral pyre, but Denethor sets himself alight and dies. Merry and Pippin
are reunited and Aragorn heals Merry, Eowyn and Faramir. The army then moves out to Mordor, where an
emissary of Sauron produces Frodo’s cloak and sword saying that if the troops do not withdraw, Frodo will be
tortured. Gandalf snatches the objects from him and another war begins. Pippin saves Beregond from a troll,
but faints just as the eagles come to their rescue.

Sam rescues Frodo and they make their way toward Mount Doom. Gollum, however, overtakes them and just
as Frodo comes to the Cracks of Doom, Gollum obtains the Ring biting off his finger. Gollum is so excited about
having the Ring back that he falls into the abyss, carrying the Ring with him. Mount Doom erupts with the
force of the destroyed Ring. Sauron is defeated for good.

The eagles rescue Sam and Frodo from the erupting volcano. Faramir woos Eowyn Arwen marries Aragorn. The
company then goes to Rohan for Theoden’s funeral, and then Gandalf and the hobbits begin their homeward
journey. The meet Saruman, who is unrepentant, then make their way to Rivendell, where they meet Bilbo.
After this the hobbits reach the Shire, which has been completely transformed by Saruman and his servants. It
is a barren military wasteland. The Shire hobbits manage to regain control and defeat Saruman. They restore
the Shire with some help from Lady Galadriel.

The novel ends with Frodo’s retirement. Elrond, Gandalf and Galadriel accompany him and Bilbo to the Grey
Havens. Sam, Merry and Pippin return to live a full life in Hobbiton.

1. If given a chance to be physically invisible, what are the things that you would possibly do? (Justify)

If I were given a chance to physically invisible, I would destroy all the illegal drugs laboratories and
arrest those makers and suppliers all over the world. So that no more youth and people live will be destroyed.
Also, for me, it will lessen the criminal cases that are happening nowadays in our country or even in abroad. In
addition, I will get the confidential papers with regards to every government official to reveal and to know
what behind their back and who among them is honest.
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

Eye in the Sky

Eye in the sky stars Helen Mirren as Colonel Katherine Powell, a UK-based military officer in command
of a top-secret drone operation to capture terrorists in Kenya. Through remote surveillance and on-the-ground
intel, Powell discovers the targets are planning a suicide bombing and the mission escalates from "capture" to
"kill." But as American pilot Steve Watts (Aaron Paul) is about to engage, a nine-year old girl enters the kill
zone triggering an international dispute, reaching the highest levels of US and British government, over the
moral, political, and personal implications of modern warfare.

Eye in the Sky takes place mostly in Nairobi, Kenya. We see a young girl named Alia playing in her backyard
with a hula hoop.

We cut to British Army Colonel Katherine Powell waking up early in the morning at Northwood Headquarters.
Her team informs her that the Al-Shabaab group has murdered an undercover agent. They put her in charge of
a mission to capture three of the highest-level Al-Shabaab leaders. Currently, they are meeting at a safe house
in Nairobi.

From thousands of miles away, a multinational team works together via secure audio and video systems to
complete the mission. Second Lieutenant Steve Watts of the USAF controls drones from Creech Air Force Base
in Nevada to survey the area. Jama Farah, an undercover Kenyan agent, provides ground intelligence to
Kenyan special forces at the ready nearby.

At the Joint Intelligence Center Pacific at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, they use facial recognition to identify the
correct human targets. Finally, in the United Kingdom, British Lieutenant General Frank Benson, two full
government ministers and a ministerial under-secretary supervise the mission from a COBRA meeting.

Farah observes the three high-level targets are preparing two suicide bombers (one of whom is an American)
to attack civilians. Colonel Powell then changes the mission objective from capture to kill. She orders Watts to
prepare his drone for a Hellfire missile attack on the building. She then requests an opinion from the British
Army legal counsel.

Much to her annoyance, the counsel punts the decision to their superiors at the COBRA meeting. Each one of
the members has their own personal legal and political biases towards the negative publicity associated with
the killing of innocent civilians.

Of course, they fail to reach a valid conclusion, and defer to the UK Foreign Secretary who is currently out on a
trade mission to Singapore. He also punts the decision, and defers to the US Secretary of State who is currently
in Beijing for business. The US Secretary of State declares the American suicide bomber as an enemy of the
state. After that, the Foreign Secretary orders COBRA to be diligent with the collateral damage from the strike.

Back in Kenya, Alia lives next door to the targeted building, and she goes to sell her mother’s bread in front of
it. The military personnel argue the risks of letting the terrorist leaders escape along with the two suicide
bombers versus the risk of injuring the little girl.

With the lawyers and politicians involved, the mission gets bogged down in petty arguments and legal
ramblings associated with an attack taking place in a friendly country and not at war with the US or UK.

Back in Nevada, Watts and his enlisted sensor operator, Carrie Gershon, do not like the little girl selling bread
outside the targeted building. They do their best to delay firing their missiles until she moves. The team orders
Farah buy all of Alia’s bread so she will leave, but in doing so, he blows his cover, and is forced to retreat from
his position; spilling the bread. Alia picks it up to sell a second time.

Powell requests final permission to strike. She has her risk-assessment officer find parameters that lowers the
risk of civilian deaths to 45%. After he does his re-evaluation, he concludes Alia has a 45–65% chance of dying.
She orders him to confirm only the lower figure, and then reports that number to her superiors.
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

They authorize the strike, and Watts fires a missile. The missile reduces the building to rubble; Alia is severely
injured but not dead. However, one of the bombers also survived, so they order Watts to fire a second missile.
It hits as Alia’s parents reach their daughter. Although they are injured in the second explosion too, they rush
Alia to a hospital. There, she dies.

Back in the London situation room, the under-secretary yells at Benson for killing from the safety of his chair.
Benson yells back that while she’s been having coffee and biscuits, he has been on the ground at five suicide
bombings and adds: “Never tell a soldier that he does not know the cost of war.”

The film ends with the image of little Alia hula hooping in Kenya.

2. Would you kill one person to save many others? Yes or No and Justification.

For me it’s a yes and a no at the same time. Yes, because we have to think of others and how many
people were suffer if we did not do that certain thing. Just like in the story where the father get to the point
when he need to choose whether he will let his son died, to save others if he put down the railway or let
those people riding the train died if he will save his son by not putting the railway down. In the end, he
chooses to put down the railway to save many others and let his son died, even if it very hard for him because
it is his own son.

No, because nowadays many people are selfish, they didn’t mind those people who will suffer or
suffering just to get their personal interest. Just like in the movie ‘What Happened to Monday’. Monday let her
sister suffered and died.
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

The Euthyphro Dilemma

Euthyphro Dilemma is a philosophical problem concerned with a view of morality related to theism.

The Euthyphro Dilemma asks: do the gods love good action because it is good, or is good action good because
it is loved by the gods?

The problem comes from Plato’s Euthyphro, and is asked by Socrates to Euthyphro.

Euthyphro’s dilemma is a challenge to the moral absolutist position of divine command theory in meta-ethics.
Divine command theory, which is generally held by many monotheistic religions, holds that ethical statements
such as “charity is good” obtain their truth values from attributes of God. That is, the statement “charity is
good” if and only if God loves charity.

Euthyphro’s dilemma challenges this position by questioning whether this means that what is morally correct
is merely an arbitrary choice by God, or whether or not these things have greater, eternal truth. Each position
has problems:

The first position is to state that God loves good things because they are good. This claim is generally a denial
of divine command theory — it states that there is goodness that is determined independantly of God. The
major problem with this view is that it holds that there is something outside of God, over which God has no
control — that is, God is not fully omnipotent. It’s also worth pointing out that taking this position denies that
God is necessary for morality.

The second position is to assert that what is good is good merely because God says that it is good. If God’s
choices are arbitrary, then morality is not objective. This view holds that anything, at any time, could become
good or bad. Phrases like “murder is wrong” are contingent on how God feels about any particular action. For
instance, if God commands a murder, then it is a just murder. It may be that, tomorrow, God changes the
rules. If God’s choices are arbitrary, then they are not rational, and there is no reason to make assumptions
about what God wants. There seems to be no reason to say that it is necessary that one obey God, other than
that obedience may bring reward while disobedience may bring punishment.

Under the second position, it would also be misleading to say something like “God is good”. Under divine
command theory, that amounts to “God loves God”, which is not what is normally intended by religious claims
of that nature.

Plato's dialog called Euthyphro relates a discussion that took place between Socrates and Euthyphro
concerning the meaning of piety, or that virtue usually regarded as a manner of living that fulfills one's duty
both to gods and to humanity. It is of particular interest in relation to the fate of Socrates inasmuch as he has
recently been charged with impiety and is about to be tried before the Athenian court to determine his guilt or
innocence of the crime attributed to him. Because he felt quite sure that the Athenian people in general did
not understand the real nature of either piety or impiety, Socrates asks Euthyphro to answer the question
"What is piety?" He has a real purpose in doing this, for Euthyphro, a Sophist, professes to be wise concerning
such matters, while Socrates, making no such claim for himself, professes only to be ignorant. He wants to see
if Euthyphro is as wise as he claims to be, and if he is not, Socrates will expose the shallowness of his claim.

Euthyphro has the reputation of being a wise person, a diviner, and a soothsayer. As a teacher, he gives
instruction on moral and political matters, as well as the practical problems of everyday living. The discussion
that is carried on between Socrates and Euthyphro takes place on the porch of King Archon.

Both Socrates and Euthyphro are involved in matters of a legal nature. Socrates has been accused of impiety
and is facing a court trial. Euthyphro is the plaintiff in a forthcoming trial for murder. Socrates asks who it is
who is being charged with this crime. He is surprised and shocked to learn that Euthyphro is bringing this
charge against his own father. The circumstances bringing this about have a direct bearing on the case. It
appears that a poor dependent of the Euthyphro family had killed one of their domestic servants. At the
command of Euthyphro's father, the guilty person had been bound and thrown into a ditch. Messengers had
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

then been sent to Athens to inquire of the interpreters of religion concerning what should be done with him.
By the time these messengers had returned, the criminal had died from hunger and exposure. Euthyphro's
father was, at least to some extent, responsible for the offender's death, and this was the basis for charging
him with the crime of murder.

Socrates is impressed by the fact that Euthyphro is willing to perform his duty in the matter even though it
means taking action against a member of his own family. Without any further discussion of the case involving
Euthyphro's father, Socrates is anxious to pursue inquiry concerning the nature of piety since this is directly
related to the fact that Meletus has accused him of the crime of impiety. Accordingly, he addresses this
question to Euthyphro, "What is piety?" Euthyphro answers at once that piety is acting the way he is acting in
bringing charges against one who has done wrong, even though that person happens to be his own father.
Although admitting that Euthyphro is right in not allowing personal relationships to stand in the way of
performing his duty, Socrates is not satisfied with the answer that has been given to his question. An example
of the virtue of piety is not equivalent to a definition of that virtue. Euthyphro has given but one example, and
even though he defended his statement by mentioning that certain of the Greek gods have acted in a similar
manner, Socrates insists that a proper definition of piety must be sufficient to include all instances of that
virtue. Euthyphro's statement has not been adequate for this purpose. Nevertheless, Socrates insists that,
inasmuch as Euthyphro has brought a criminal charge against his own father, he must have known the nature
of impiety or he would have been unable to decide that his father was guilty of it. Once again, he urges
Euthyphro to tell him what piety is. If he can obtain a satisfactory answer to this question, it will enable him to
know whether the charge that Meletus is bringing against him is a well-founded one.

In reply, Euthyphro advances another statement. He says, "Piety is what is dear to the gods and impiety is that
which is not dear to them." Upon examination by Socrates, this statement turns out to be no more satisfactory
than the former one. It is not clear what makes anything dear to the gods, and besides, there is the question of
whether that which is dear to some of the gods is dear to all of them or only to some of them. Euthyphro then
insists that piety is that which is pleasing to all of the gods. He feels sure they all agree that murder is wrong.
Socrates then points out that the circumstances under which killing takes place makes an important difference
concerning the moral quality of the act. The same is true with reference to the motive that was involved. It is
quite evident that so far, the discussion has not produced any satisfactory answer to the question concerning
the nature of piety.

To approach the subject in a different way, Socrates asks Euthyphro if people who are pious are also just. Yes,
says Euthyphro, but at the same time he recognizes that it is not true that all just persons are pious. Socrates
then wants to know if piety is a part of justice, and if it is, of what part does it consist? Euthyphro replies that
piety is that part of justice that attends to the gods, just as there is another part of justice that attends to men.
This, too, is unsatisfactory because we do not know what "attends" means. When applied to some things such
as dogs, horses, and men, it implies some way of making them better. When applied to gods, it cannot have
this meaning since there is no respect in which men can make the gods better than they are. At this point,
Euthyphro states that there are various ways in which men can minister to the gods, but he does not have the
time to point them out.

Socrates still insists that he does not know what piety is, and certainly Euthyphro has not revealed its true
nature. The question is an important one, not only for Socrates, but for anyone who is called upon to make
decisions relative to moral conduct. The dialog closes without any final answer to the question with which the
discussion started. Socrates urges Euthyphro to continue the search for the meaning of piety. Until he has
found it, there can be no justification for the decision he has made concerning his father.

3. Do the gods love good action because it is good, or is good action good because it is loved by the
gods?

For me, good action is good because it is loved by the God, because we ask or consider the Ten
Commandments before we do that such thing. We are avoiding to commit a sin because we might go to hell in
our afterlife as a punishment.
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

COMPILATION OF POSITION PAPERS AND

REPORTS IN ETHICS

In partial fulfillment of
the requirement of the course
GED-SS04 ETHICS

Aprilyn Joy L. Bualoy

BTLE- AFA I

Dr. Edgardo S. Villaseñor

Professor

2nd Term
AY 2019-2020
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

Table of Contents
I. Position Papers and Movie Analysis

i. The Ring of Gyges Dilemma

ii. The Trolley Problem
iii. The Euthyphro Dilemma
iv. PK

II. Class Reports

i. Añonuevo, Joan M. - ……MESOPOTAMIA

ii. Abrencillo, Donna G. - GREECE
iii. Alcantara, Aira Kezia T. - EGYPT
iv. Argosino, Mary Claire A.- BABYLON
v. Asilo, Mark Joeven B. - ROME
vi. Barriata, Mark Leonard D. - CHINA
vii. Batarlo, Trisha Mae - INDIA
viii. Boctot, John Mark B.- HEDONISM
ix. Bualoy, Aprilyn Joy L. - CYNICISM
x. Buendia, Mary Rose A. - EPICURIANISM
xi. Capistrano, Lhea Mae A. - EASTERN RELIGIONS/HINDUISM
xii. Deocales, Daniel E. - JAINISM
xiii. Embile,Sherwin F. - BUDDHISM
xiv. Geneblazo Jr, Gallardo S.- CONFUCIANISM
xv. Gonzales, Clarisse S. - TAOISM/SHINTOISM
xvi. Gulifardo, Angelo L. - WESTERN RELIGIONS/CHRISTIANITY
xvii. Hernandez, Westlyn Love P.- ISLAM
xviii. Jardio, Diemar Z.- JUDAISM
xix. Lopez, Jeany Rose R. - EXTRENISM/AETHISM
xx. Mique, Rodel Jordan De Guzman - ETHICS OF MODERN-CULTURAL RELATIVES
xxi. Mostoles, Annie Rose S. - BEHAVIORISM
xxii. Oblena, Erica Mae L. - PSCHOANALYSIS
xxiii. Olveros, Khaysel l.- UTILITARIANISM
xxiv. Pagorogon, Ray R, - EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
xxv. Peñaflor, Shianne B. - ALTRIUSM/DEONTOLOGISM
xxvi. Perida, Coolin Mae P. - ALTRIUSM/EGOISM
xxvii. Puno, Alexis - THE PHILOSOPHY OF MICHEL FOUCAULT/JEAN BANDRILLARD
xxviii. Ramos, Ma. Teresita P. - JEAN FRANCOIS LYOTARD/JACQUES LACAN
xxix. Santiago, Rose Ann May V. - FEMINIST ETHICAL
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

xxx. Savaceda, Almyra A. - universal health Law in the Philippines

xxxi. Severa, Dane Khryssel L. - CHARACTERISTICS OF FILIPINO ETHICS
xxxii. Tablante, Sarah Mae F. - RELIGIONS CONFLICT IN THE PHILIPPINES
xxxiii. Targa, Marinette C. - RELIGIONS CONFLICT IN THE WORLD
xxxiv. Valecia, Michael Angelo V. - FAMILY CODE
xxxv. Villar, Karen L. - SAME SEX MARRIAGE/SOGIE BILL
xxxvi. Villar, MaxineAnne A. - SEXUAL MORALITY/MARRIAGE
xxxvii. Villasanta, Princess ETHICALICIDE/DEPRESSION
 Philippine Normal University
The National Center for Teacher Education
The Technology and Livelihood Education Hub
South Luzon Campus

Reflection to the movie ‘PK’

After I watched the movie PK featuring Amir Khan there are many things that I learned. From the start
when he (PK) arrived in our planet he is naked which symbolizes innocence. Then he learned our language and
he started to ask different gods to help him to find his remote so that he can go back his planet. Through his
journey finding his remote he met Jaggu whom he shared his journey and his ability to read the minds of other
people when he held their hand and later on where he fell in love with. At first Jaggu is not believing him until
an old man hold PK’s hand and ask for money because his wife was in the hospital. PK gave him money and
added some for tip. After several seconds Jaggu told him that the old woman deceived him because there is no
hospital near that place. He told her that the old man’s wife was celebrating her 75 th birthday and he (old man)
brought her in a five (5) star hotel as a gift, for the very first time in her life. The old woman asked for an extra
ice cream but the money of the old man was just enough for their food he go out and ask for money from other
people. Because Jaggu was doubting him, she followed the old man and found all of what PK told her was true.
It shows the old man’s love for his dear wife also the honesty of PK. After several hours he realized what he
called wrong number- misconception of one thing and started to spread it all over the country. Many people get
confused they start to ask questions and put a paper in the donation box instead of money. It caused the
misunderstanding between PK and Tapasvi Ji. The issue got bigger and bigger. As the day pass PK learned to
love Jaggu but he does not know how to tell it to her that’s why he wrote it in a piece of paper and put it
between the cards that he told Jaggu to choose what name he could have. One name in the card makes Jaggu to
stop from reading the other it is Sarfaraz her ex- lover. PK hold her hand that’s why he was able to know what
happened between them. It was followed by the news that the person who stole his remote was in his friend or
brother abduction and he will bring it with him the following day. PK wait wait at the train station but
something terrible happened, before they can reach PK the train station exploded and the two died and left
nothing but a piece of shoe. The following day is his interview with Tapasvi Ji. Where they compromised that if
Tapsvi Ji’s prediction was true PK will kneel before him and ask for forgiveness. But if PK won, he will get his
remote control. They talked about what happened between Jaggu and Sarfaraz. PK ask Jaggu, when she and
Sarfaraz were about to marry, if the child who gave her the letter known her personally and she told him no. If
the letter has a name written on it telling it came from Sarfaraz, again she told him no. Then he (PK) told her
that is wrong number. Because the child do not know to whom the letter should be given he just followed the
instruction that he should gave it to the one with cat that time the one who own the cat was in the front and tell
her to hold it for a while that’s why she receive a letter which is not really for her. That day when Jaggu have
read the letter she just goes and because Tapasvi Ji told her that Muslims are unfaithful she thought that Sarfaraz
cheated on her. Again, PK told her that it is wrong number. To know the truth, Jaggu and her agency called the
organization and school that will lead to Sarfaraz. Lastly, they called the Pakistan embassy which Sarfaraz told
her that he is working on. They got surprise because the agency knows who she is that is why she asked them,
and they told her that Sarfaraz was calling every day to ask if they receive a call from Delhi. She asked Sarfaraz
if he came to the registrar that day he said yes. She asked him why he did not contact her for a long time and
Sarfaraz told her that when he read her letter it tells that never contact her anymore. After that Tapasvi Ji was
supposed to get the remote but the father of Jaggu and gave it to PK. It shows that there are things that we
misinterpret and judge other people without knowing the other side of the story. Then PK was going back to his
planet he saved those conversation with Jaggu in a tape which he told that it contains the different sound from
our planet and he will listen to it if he was missing the earth and he will wave as if she will see it. But Jaggu
knew the truth and she also read the letter for her saying I Love You Jaggu. She learned from him and he also
learned from her also he learned to tell lies.

Overall, the movie shows that we should trust the one who created us. It teaches us to always know the other
side of the story so that we can be prevented to judge other people. It also shows the true meaning of love. Love
that makes PK let Jaggu to go, so that he can be with Sarfaraz- the one she loves.