# Can you make easy moral judgements? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 17, 2007, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618 "2007-02-17T15:16:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![whyiseveryonestupid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ac8455/32.png) [@whyiseveryonestupid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whyiseveryonestupid)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/1 "2007-02-17T15:16:50Z")
Need to make clear this is entirely hypothetical, I’m in no moral dilemma! Consider 2 different types of people - One lives a fairly legal normal life, not hurting anyone on a day to day basis but if put in the right situation would do something really immoral without a second thought just to meet their own selfish ends - ie, kill an old woman, falsely put a pregnant woman in prison etc. They are mainly interested in looking after themselves and not going out of their way to help anyone else. The other lives a far less moral life, breaking the law in ‘small’ ways on a frequent basis - ie tax evasion, selling counterfeit goods etc and would happily have an affair (with no kids involved), sell drugs (solely to adults) etc. But they have very strong ‘core’ moral beliefs - ie only ever ‘hurts’ people they think deserve it, would always defend someone vulnerable would NEVER rape/kill/hurt someone innocent for ANY reason. They go out of their way to help people who have had these terrible things done to them. Now is one of these people better than the other because of the overall damage/ good they do or is it impossible to say? ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/2 "2007-02-17T16:04:49Z")
Ah, the old LE vs CG debate. Carry on. -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/3 "2007-02-17T16:08:21Z")
What if they do it all; skirt the law in minor ways, offer a helping hand to neighbors _and_ kill old ladies, given the chance? ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/4 "2007-02-17T16:13:28Z")
Wait, what about the car on fire and the seatbelt and the gun and the kid again? I love hypotheticals. **whyiseveryonestupid!** , neither person you describe is acting in an ethical manner by the time you get to the end of your sentence. Whether or not they are following their own moral code is a different question. Morals are simply rules you live by - ideally they are derived from larger ethical principles, but they don’t have to be. Hanging a black man for touching a white woman was entirely in line with the morals of rural Alabama pre-1950. That doesn’t mean it was ethical, right, justified or acceptable. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/5 "2007-02-17T16:18:15Z")
[QUOTE=WhyNot] Wait, what about the car on fire and the seatbelt and the gun and the kid again? I love hypotheticals. [/QUOTE] I love that thread and thought of it immediately after reading the OP. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/6 "2007-02-17T16:25:23Z")
[QUOTE=Frylock] Ah, the old LE vs CG debate. Carry on. -FrL- [/QUOTE] Could you elaberate? LE? CG? ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/7 "2007-02-17T16:26:17Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] I love that thread and thought of it immediately after reading the OP. [/QUOTE] Slight hijack: > [@This joke that gets read around Philosophy departments and elsewhere](#): > > Consider the following case: A brain in a vat is at the wheel of a runaway trolley > approaching a fork in the track. The brain is hooked up to the trolley in such > a way that the brain can determine which course the trolley will take. There > are only two options: the right side of the fork or the left side. There is no way > to derail or stop the trolley and the brain is aware of this. On the right side of > the track there is a single railroad worker, Jones, who will definitely be killed > if the brain steers the trolley to the right. If Jones lives he will go on to kill five > men for the sake of thirty orphans (one of the five men he will kill is planning > to destroy a bridge that the orphans’ bus will be crossing later that night). One > of the orphans who will be killed would have grown up to become a tyrant > who made good, utilitarian men do bad things, another would have become > John Sununu, and a third would have invented the pop-top can. > If the brain in the vat chooses the left side of the track, the trolley will definitely > hit and kill another railman, Leftie, and will hit and destroy ten beating hearts > on the track that would have been transplanted into ten patients at the local > hospital who will die without donor hearts. These are the only hearts available, > and the brain is aware of this. If the railman on the left side of the track lives, > he, too, will kill five men–in fact, the same five that the railman on the right > would kill. However, Leftie will kill the five as an unintended consequence of > saving ten men: he will inadvertently kill the five men as he rushes the ten hearts > to the local hospital for transplantation. A further result of Leftie’s act is that the > busload of orphans will be spared. Among the five men killed by Leftie is the > man responsible for putting the brain at the controls of the trolley. If the ten > hearts and Leftie are killed by the trolley, the ten prospective heart-transplant > patients will die and their kidneys will be used to save the lives of twenty > kidney-transplant patients, one of whom will grow up to cure cancer and one > of whom will grow up to be Hitler. There are other kidneys and dialysis > machines available, but the brain does not know this. > Assume that the brain’s choice, whatever it turns out to be, will serve as an example > to other brains in vats, and thus the effects of its decision will be amplified. Also > assume that if the brain chooses the right side of the fork, an unjust war free of war > crimes will ensue, whereas if the brain chooses the left fork, a just war fraught with > war comes will result. Furthermore, there is an intermittently active Cartesian demon > deceiving the brain in such a way that the brain is never sure if it is being deceived. > Question: Ethically speaking, what should the brain do? Justify your answer ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/8 "2007-02-17T16:27:35Z")
[QUOTE=enipla] Could you elaberate? LE? CG? [/QUOTE] [Here ya go](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_(Dungeons_&_Dragons)) :). -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/9 "2007-02-17T17:11:07Z")
CG all the way - for me, most of the things person 2 does that are “immoral” are fairly low on the totem pole, and I don’t buy into the “all sins are equal” approach. If he’s someone who avoids actively spreading real evil, he’s good people. The weird thing is that the only thing on the list of small-scale moral faults I disagreed was not hurting anyone, was the affair. I mean, I can _see_ how tax evasion & petty fraud is a bad thing for society, but it’s the cheating I see as really not belonging on the list. Go figure. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/10 "2007-02-17T19:56:08Z")
I play D&D, & I’m having trouble telling which one is LE & which one is CG. Actually, I think the first one is TN, since he mostly follows the law, but not consistently when it counts, & is self-interested. The second one is probably in the CG quadrant. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/11 "2007-02-17T20:10:58Z")
Those are some mixed-up people, is what they are. If pressed, I’d say the second person is marginally “better,” because his potential for seriously immoral or evil actions is more limited than the first. The first would murder an innocent person, which is about the most awful thing any human being can do, while the second wouldn’t, according to the OP. Neither will be getting the Citizen of the Year Award in Elendil City, though. ---
**Author:** ![whyiseveryonestupid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ac8455/32.png) [@whyiseveryonestupid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whyiseveryonestupid)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/12 "2007-02-17T22:21:51Z")
Thanks for all the replies, don’t think the 2 people really fit comfortably into the D&D definitions but its a good concept. Personally I thought someone who was generally good and tried to help those really in need (person 2) but continously did ‘minor’ things wrong should be far less damaging in their life than a person who did nothing wrong for most of the time but when they did ruined someone’s life. ---
**Author:** ![According\_to\_Pliny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e7dd6/32.png) [@According\_to\_Pliny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/According_to_Pliny)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/13 "2007-02-17T22:33:48Z")
Seems the OP asks if a number of small crimes equals a big crime. Sure, if you keep adding things up. Embezzle a hundred dollars from ten accounts or a thousand from one. Roughly the same crime. Cause some different people a day’s misery for a month, or give one person a month’s worth of misery. Pretty close again. Karma is cumulative. ---
**Author:** ![whyiseveryonestupid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ac8455/32.png) [@whyiseveryonestupid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whyiseveryonestupid)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/14 "2007-02-17T23:01:09Z")
[QUOTE=According to Pliny] Seems the OP asks if a number of small crimes equals a big crime. Sure, if you keep adding things up. Embezzle a hundred dollars from ten accounts or a thousand from one. Roughly the same crime. Cause some different people a day’s misery for a month, or give one person a month’s worth of misery. Pretty close again. Karma is cumulative. [/QUOTE] But what if you change those figures and give some different people a week’s misery or make one person bankrupt and out on the street? Neither is right per se but one would be far preferable to be in than the other. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2007, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/15 "2007-02-17T23:40:47Z")
[QUOTE=whyiseveryonestupid!] But what if you change those figures and give some different people a week’s misery or make one person bankrupt and out on the street? Neither is right per se but one would be far preferable to be in than the other. [/QUOTE] Then you’re biasing the question to get the answer you want. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2007, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/16 "2007-02-18T03:50:38Z")
The problem with hypotheticals like the OP is that the actions mentioned are without context. And in the area of ethics, context is everything. People’s actions, in and of themselves, are rarely open to black-or-white judgments. How can you judge a particular action without knowing the circumstances and motivation? Especially the vague examples like “looking out for themselves” or “having an affair.” ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2007, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/17 "2007-02-18T06:57:39Z")
[QUOTE=whyiseveryonestupid!] Now is one of these people better than the other because of the overall damage/ good they do or is it impossible to say? [/QUOTE] The best you can do determine a “best” is to take track sets of each type of person and add up the collateral damage/help and see which group, over time, ended up doing better. I would vote that group 1 will do better as a complete society since the odds of being put in a position where you have to make a hard choice on the level of what you describe is pretty small–particularly if you’re living in a society of just group 1ers. I suspect that in terms of one-to-one interactions with other people that group 2 would seem better, but tracking out their effect out on society as a whole that they would produce a significant downforce. If everyone skimps on their taxes, then roads go to hell, schools crumble, etc. Would the group 2 person have a sufficiently clear view of himself in a society and economy to be able to mend his ways so that the roads and schools could be fixed again? I doubt it given as otherwise they wouldn’t have slacked off to start with. To add some RPG stuff, I would just point out the effect of a debuffing class, and how people tend to always think they’re not doing anything worthwhile, yet the group fails the instant the debuffer leaves the group. A small effect, added up over time, can be a very significant force. Just look at global warming. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2007, 9:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-you-make-easy-moral-judgements/392618/18 "2007-02-18T09:18:44Z")
The first sounds to me like a psychopathic personality. The second sounds like a petty criminal, although all the activities he appears to indulge in are pretty run of the mill. Rather than using the word ‘moral’, which I intensely dislike, it sounds as if the second guy’s ethics are far more in line with current society’s ethics. More accurately, the first guy does not have any ‘ethics’, just an aversion to being caught.