Posted by LegWarmers on March 22, 2006, at 6:49:18
In reply to Re: Moral dilemma, posted by special_k on March 21, 2006, at 21:29:35
> Though if he really does have a duty to his wife then maybe he does have a duty to steal the drug. Given that the harm to his wife is greater than the harm to the shopkeeper he probably does have a duty to steal the drug (so I ammend my previous answer)
>
> If I remember the case rightly... The drug cost $1,000 to make... I think he should have left the $1,000 on the bench as he left.
>
> That way the only thing he is hurting (re the shopkeeper) is his sense of entitlement...
>
> (and tresspass on his property...)
>
> (and maybe it took him some time and effort (which should be compensated))
>
> i'm tempted to say the shopkeeper should be punished...
> But i'm not sure whether that is coming from anger or moral reasoning ;-)The idea is.. that at the highest stage of morality, stage 6. A person makes the call that life has more value than the druggest's drugs. We have a duty to prevent death .....
I think the druggest should be punished too! Its just evil IMO
Its too early for me atm, so I hope I worded this right
poster:LegWarmers
thread:623115
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20060318/msgs/623263.html