Amazon.com Widgets

Do we have a moral obligation to intervene if we see suffering?

  • I have helped sufferers even when woken from a dead sleep.

    I have helped mama chickens gather her babies under the tree she lived in. I have stopped a 14 year old suicidal girl from slicing her wrists and I have saved countless ducks and other wildlife if I witnessed them suffering. For me, It is the reason I live. I couldn’t stop if you paid me. I feel it’s my duty to help but I don’t feel anyone else is OBLIGATED. If you feel the calling, Do what feels right. I am so grateful to have helped others eve. Ry chance I have been given. At 50, It’s been a very large number of souls and plants as well. <3

  • Selflessness is a virtue

    You are being selfish if you just pass a homeless person in the street without even checking your pockets. You are selfish if you don't intervene between child abuse. Yes, It may put you in danger, But you have to help people. Walking past that person suffering or feeling sad is just selfish. Maybe it would cause you to suffer, But you have to think of other people in this situation. That is a stupid argument. You're not intervening, You're helping.

  • Altruism is a human instinct

    Selflessness is a universal and innate inclination that exists in all human beings. When there is something wrong, Those who have the ability to take action have the responsibility to take action. In every major world culture and religion, You find a common morality of selfless service. World religions teach what could be called "Level 3 morality"; a morality of transcending the ego, Of charity, Self-sacrifice, Etc.

  • Ladiesman has answered it perfectly

    "Altruism is a human instinct Selflessness is a universal and innate inclination that exists in all human beings. When there is something wrong, Those who have the ability to take action have the responsibility to take action. In every major world culture and religion, You find a common morality of selfless service. World religions teach what could be called "Level 3 morality"; a morality of transcending the ego, Of charity, Self-sacrifice, Etc.
    Posted by: ladiesman". . . First let's define the crucial word in "ladiesman"'s argument. . . INSTINCT a largely inheritable and unalterable tendency of an organism to make a complex and specific response to environmental stimuli without involving reason. . . Based on these wards and given that it is an instinct to "intervene if we see suffering", Then there is no reason to debate it or offer an opinion. Nor will it be necessary for the Government to end all suffering. . . Because man instinctively chooses to end suffering he will act accordingly.

  • We do not have a moral obligation to intervene if we see suffering.

    Suffering is very common in the world, And is actually an important part of human development. Having people help themselves creates personal growth and instills self-reliance. If everything was done for a child, They would never know how to do things for themselves. Another reason for this is that if we intervene in someone's suffering, We could also suffer from that. Sending troops to ground zero in a war scenario could just create more deaths. Most of the time intervening is not worth the cost, Both in effort and in human lives.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.
>