We hear countless stories of the suffering of other people by disease, starvation and war. Isn't it immoral to just stand by and allow it to continue?
2007-06-09 16:39:41 · 13 answers · asked by Matt3471 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
yes. it is immoral. and we being the hands of (christ, vishnu, allah, yahwe,) are wallowing in immorality for allowing these immoralities befall our fellow men.
2007-06-09 18:30:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First there must be an understanding of morality. Morals are individual principles by which we make decisions about our own lives. Opinions that we express about how others should behave are not moral, but rather evidence of weak morals and laziness. Second, we must understand that allowing suffering is not the same as causing it. Third, suffering is really about perspective and opinion, rather than reality. When we see hungry children, we believe they must be suffering, because we cannot imagine not having food. We cannot stop the suffering of others, we must choose to stop suffering ourselves, and once we have become free, then we can lead others by example. Suffering has nothing to do with our circumstances, it has to do with our relationship to the world and our belief about our place in it.
2007-06-10 00:04:00 · answer #2 · answered by robertm_29402 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What school of morality are we talking about here? it all depends.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
"There has been considerable work done in studying comparative morality among cultures. To such researchers, morality is not seen as a constant essential "truth" but as a series of values that is influenced by (and influences) the cultural context. This is often called moral relativism.
One well known commentator is Fons Trompenaars, author of Did the Pedestrian Die?, which tested various moral propositions. One of these was whether the driver of a car would have his friend, a passenger riding in the car, lie in order to protect the driver from the consequences of driving too fast and hitting a pedestrian. Trompenaars found that different cultures had quite different expectations (from none to almost certain)."
2007-06-09 23:41:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do not believe there is any way for us to stop the suffering but I think that we should try to minimize it. For me, I like to start at home by buying groceries for underprivileged families. I do not do this through not-for-profit organizations but I just try to find out what family is in need at a particular point in time. I know that a very small percentage of funds received by not-for-profit organizations are used to help people. The majority of funds received by the Red Cross & United Way goes to salaries and operating expenses. Sure, they need to run their offices but have you seen some of these offices they rent? Man, it would be a nice place for a homeless family to live. And just think how many people could be helped with just a small percentage of the Executive Director's salary at the United Way...this guy gets a 6 digit + salary.
2007-06-10 00:00:57 · answer #4 · answered by beingsmartisrelative 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not moral to allow others to suffer, unfortunately human nature is such that, millions are suffering daily as you say! How do we stop this? You can't! As long as things are going all right for most people in their lives, they just as soon turn and look away, this is human nature!! If it does not effect them they do nothing! So I guess you could reasonably conclude , that most people are immoral by nature!
2007-06-09 23:50:14 · answer #5 · answered by tonal9nagual 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That depends on the situation, all of the variables, and the moral philosophy under consideration. Complex question, has stumped philosophers for years.
But I for one would like something done about it, large scale, no "put a penny in the jar" altruism. Have you seen "V for Vendetta"? Now that's what I'm talking about (with less violence though, V gets a little out of control).
2007-06-09 23:48:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
suffering is a subjective truth of existing.....although it makes the joy and pleasures in life stand out more............on a real level, the reality is that the more poor undeveloped countries continue to increase their populations with infettered childbirth rates, the more suffering the world will see......unabated worldwide population growth is a major factor in hunger, disease, etc etc.....but what are we gonna do? impose birth control? unlikely.....
2007-06-10 00:07:08 · answer #7 · answered by enigmaticarrogantass 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
suffering is a common part of life in general some suffer more than others. plus the more you try to stop suffering you end up causing suffering to stop suffering
2007-06-09 23:44:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Okay honey, you take on the entire world's suffering. You stop every single bit of it.
How stupid does that sound? Yup. We could not possibly stop all the suffering in the world.
2007-06-09 23:42:49 · answer #9 · answered by opalescent_angel 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes and no
I don't bother helping those in other countries as my money go to sally strutters paycheck etc
I do donate to goodwill and give free rides to my friends for work plus free babysitting and I occasionally will buy groceries to feed them so long as they but normal stuff like hamburger bread potatoes etc
2007-06-09 23:45:24 · answer #10 · answered by stephaniemorosi2 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋