Is not-helping someone the same as hurting someone?

Answer 1

In many cases not helping someone proves to be a bliss.
The basic instinct of survival and and do better in life come to the fore when someone goes about them without any external help. If someone is drowning then a help might be a boon.

Answer 2

The answer is no! Not helping someone is not the same as hurting someone bec for one thing the former is passive and the latter is active.


That said, there is no way to answer your Q w/o further definition of the moral problem. I refuse to speculate about the numerous possible circumstances w/o a clearer exposition of the situation and the context of your ethics Q--that is if you want to do real ethics! I hate "it-depends" type Answers bec that means the Q-asker did not pose the Q with sufficient info to focus on a useful, realistic answer!

Also "same" in what sense? Ethically? Physically? Mentally?

You can see the lack of problem definition by just looking at the A's to your struggling hypothetical. The A's are all over the map!

I suggest re-asking a more narrow, better focused Q to get at what you really want to know.

Answer 3

Of course there is a difference. One is blue while one is purple and if you look at them just right in the right light from the right angle they’re the same but they’re really not.

#1 requires an action on our part or bad will happen to another
we’re not going out of our way to help

#2 requires an action or everything will be good
we’re going out of our way to hurt

How far should our obligations to society and others go?

Answer 4

Yes something like that,because by helping someone you have the opportunity of saving them from pain and heart-ache.On the other hand if it means interfering with their lives just because you think your help is right then it is hurting that someone.

Answer 5

no, not really..

if he asked for help, and you didn't help even if you have the means, then that is kind of hurting the person.. but again, take a look back of your intentions, if you intend to see the person succumb to helplessness with no sympathy, then you are hurting the person's soul- to him, he didn't really know you had the means to help..
ifyou didn't help because you're tied up with your family or loved ones, or some similar reasons, then i think you're not hurting the person.. i think he would be able to manage it all alone somehow..

Answer 6

What can we do to 'help' anyone? If a person asks for something and you have it to give then it only makes sense to give it. If you don't have it to give then how can you give it? I can help a person physically by carrying them or feeding them if they have no food and I have food to give. I can not help someone if they are asking for advice on how to live. Who knows how to live any better than anyone else? There's no ethical issue, it's just a matter of situation.

Answer 7

"Do not hide behind such superficiality as whether you should or should not give a dime to a beggar. That is not the issue. The issue is whether you do or do not have the right to exist without giving him that dime. The issue is whether you must keep buying your life, dime by dime, from any beggar who might choose to approach you. The issue is whether the need of others is the first mortgage on your life and the moral purpose of your existence. The issue is whether man is to be regarded as a sacrificial animal. Any man of self-esteem will answer: "No." Altruism says: "Yes." " [Philosophy Who Needs it? - Ayn Rand]

"It is important to differentiate between the rules of conduct in an emergency situation and the rules of conduct in the normal conditions of human existence. This does not mean a double standard of morality: the standard and the basic principles remain the same, but their application to either case requires precise definitions.

"An emergency is an unchosen, unexpected event, limited in time, that creates conditions under which human survival is impossible—such as a flood, an earthquake, a fire, a shipwreck. In an emergency situation, men's primary goal is to combat the disaster, escape the danger and restore normal conditions (to reach dry land, to put out the fire, etc.).

"By "normal" conditions I mean metaphysically normal, normal in the nature of things, and appropriate to human existence. Men can live on land, but not in water or in a raging fire. Since men are not omnipotent, it is metaphysically possible for unforeseeable disasters to strike them, in which case their only task is to return to those conditions under which their lives can continue. By its nature, an emergency situation is temporary; if it were to last, men would perish.

"It is only in emergency situations that one should volunteer
to help strangers, if it is in one's power. For instance, a man who values human life and is caught in a shipwreck, should help to save his fellow passengers (though not at the expense of his own life). But this does not mean that after they all reach shore, he should devote his efforts to saving his fellow passengers from poverty, ignorance, neurosis or whatever other troubles they might have. Nor does it mean that he should spend his life sailing the seven seas in search of shipwreck victims to save..." [The Ethics of Emergencies - Ayn Rand]

Answer 8

it would depend on the situation, i think
sometimes not helping is not hurting, its just not making their situation better
other times, say with a friend who had helped you, not helping would really hurt them, it would hurt their spirit
then, often the best thing you can do is to not help, let them work it out for theirselves
so its really a complicated question, which you have to use your best judgement and decide each individual situation

Answer 9

Sometimes it can be. Sometimes not helping someone is good for them, but occasionally it cripples them.

Answer 10

if your not helping someone for a good reason, then maybe.

if your not helping someone for a bad reason, then no.