Open Forum Ethics III

As before: Talk about and debate any ethics topics you like, from current events to cultural controversies. Keep it civil, please, wise, and trenchant.

 

144 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

144 responses to “Open Forum Ethics III

  1. JP

    I noticed David Hogg was accepted by Harvard. I won’t pretend to say it was deserved or not as I don’t know. I could guess based on arguments and syntax, but that doesn’t necessarily mean anything.

    I think the problem is even if it’s deserved, his role of “activist” makes it seem like a token gesture. I wonder if it will have any impact on the lawsuit Harvard is fighting against Asain discrimination.

  2. Andrew Wakeling

    There is something unsettling about foreigners (or rather those outside our community being accorded ‘rights’) that impose on ‘us’.

    Migrants are drowning as they attempt to cross the Mediterranean and obtain a better life in Europe. I don’t blame the migrants for trying and some of them may well be escaping quite dreadful conditions. And as a European (at least until March 2019) I broadly support sustainable collective decency, admittedly being quite unclear how this should be done. I am not therefore unsettled by a European Court ruling that migrants rescued by EU vessels must be taken to a safe port. That seems to me to be a quite reasonable codification of a collective decision which I assume (without great confidence) has some democratic legitimacy. (Ie ‘We’ have decided.)

    But I am more than unsettled by the claim, as in an NYT opinion piece today that migrant drownings show that: “European governments are avoiding their legal and moral responsibilities to protect the human rights of people fleeing violence and economic desperation”.

    Of course such unsettlement risks me being marked out as an uncaring fascist, and at least in my mind this really isn’t the case. I don’t easily accept that ‘you’ (a foreigner outside my family and community) can have any ‘rights’ that impose an obligation on ‘me’. That does NOT mean I will necessarily refuse to help you. I want to be a decent charitable man, and I will within reason finance my family and community to so act.

    There is a very practical as well as ethical angle here. It is unclear to me why the ‘Good Samaritan’ helped the distressed traveller. May be he was always ‘good’. Maybe he had just won Lotto. The important point is he ‘helped’ while others didn’t ; and it cost him. His charitable act should not place any obligation on him, or others, to help the next distressed traveller. The ‘cost’ of helping ‘one’ must not be be inflated to an obligation to help the many. The tendency will then be an unavoidable drift to meanness and away from charity. All will lose.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.