"..if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought morallly, to do it"
First Principal pages: 365-367
I'm not sure if i agree with this statement. He is saything that if it is in our power to stop something from happening, we should do it because that is the moral thing to do. I agree to an extent. What if that "something bad" will in the end be something good? There are different stipulations to what he is saying.
The first principal he makes is that if he is walking by a pond and sees his neighors child drowning, he is going t0 save that child instead of just walking by. He relates that statement to Bengal because though we may never see the people suffering, it is still as if we are walking by that pond, seeing the child dying, and we keep on walking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I do not agree with what he said. If you can not see the people in Bengal you can't look at the same way. It would be like you have no heart if you just walk by a little boy drowning. People may not keep up with what is going on in Bengal or anywhere else in the world. So some may not be aware.
I agree with what the author says. I believe we should do everything we can to end suffering world wide. It is our responsibility morally. That said, I don't do nearly everything I could be doing to end suffering. What I can't figure out and what really bothers me is that I just don't care enough to do anything about it. It's not that I don't give to charities, I do, but I could certainly do more. As Americans, we are so fortunate, but we take so much for granted. It kind of makes me sick that I know there are people all over the world who are suffering in one way or another, but I just do nothing.
Post a Comment