Are you morally obligated to save a child about to drown a 12 hr drive from you (provided you get to him in time)?
Conversation
Replying to
The concept of 'moral obligation' never made any sense to me.
There's living & acting morally, which is important. But there's no supernatural or metaphysical authority enforcing any moral 'obligation' in any meaningful sense of the term.
10
53
Show replies
Replying to
I’d notify the authorities and go back to surfing twutter.
I know this wasn’t the answer we were all looking for and I’m sorry.
Replying to
If he can thread water for 12 hours he sure doesn’t need me - maybe Michael Phelps or someone from that league. Bear Grylls. Certainly not me.
1
5
Imagine a leaking boat or any other explanation instead of refusing to think about moral choices
Replying to
I voted no. I would just assume somebody closer would get to him. Nothing would piss me off more than driving 12 hours to see a non-drowning child standing on dry land.
1
7
Show replies
Replying to
According to my morals, yes. But not broadly- would be grossed out by someone who didn’t do it tho
3
Replying to
Everyone wants to say YES to this question, because everyone see’s themselves as good people. In real life morality will take a back seat to whatever is not 12 hours away.
1
People often think of others worse than they are, it is known psychological phenomena. In real life vast majority of people will drive 12 hours.