Harming intentionally, helping incidentally

Here’s an interesting little thought experiment for y’all. Watch this vid and answer the two questions.

I admit, I fell right into it. On second thought, though, I believe that people think that way due to a communications problem and difference in comprehension. It also has to do with people’s morality and their sense of ethical responsibilities. Basically, the choice of answers given shouldn’t be clear “yes-and-no”s, but rather, these are questions that require a fuller, more detailed explanation behind one’s reasoning.

For the first question (“Is he intentionally or incidentally harming the environment?”), the proper answer should be, “Yes, he is intentionally harming the environment, because the environment is our responsibility, as the creatures who bear the most power and direct influence on the planet, to keep the environment healthy and safe, and acting in a manner that we know in advance will harm it, is irresponsible and deliberate”.

At least, that’s (my attempt at explaining) how I see it. If you have any thoughts, I’d like to hear (or read) them.

(via The Agitator)
Technorati tags: philosophy · ethics