Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Oxidizing Material · 05-13-2003, 01:24 PM

Perhaps the woman's idiot child chucked the purse out her vehicle window unbeknowest?

Pyrrho · 05-13-2003, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Whispers
A question for you...

I am walking alone in the countrey on a bright summers day, miles from anywhere. No-one is about and i spot a purse on the ground. Naturally I pick it up and look inside. To my amazement, I find a stack of rolled �50 notes. What should I do? I have the name and address of the owner? Should I return the purse or keep it, and why?

Does the answer differ, if I really need the money to support my own family, or if I am wealthy and have no need for it?

Just hoping for some of your thoughts?..

Thanks =)

Return it. Why, you ask? For the short version, see:

http://ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03/nqpmr10.txt

But to give you an interesting sampling (since I know full well that most people do not like reading very much):

Quote:

Whatever contradiction may vulgarly be supposed between the SELFISH and SOCIAL sentiments or dispositions, they are really no more opposite than selfish and ambitious, selfish and revengeful, selfish and vain. It is requisite that there be an original propensity of some kind, in order to be a basis to self-love, by giving a relish to the objects of its pursuit; and none more fit for this purpose than benevolence or humanity. The goods of fortune are spent in one gratification or another: the miser who accumulates his annual income, and lends it out at interest, has really spent it in the gratification of his avarice. And it would be difficult to show why a man is more a loser by a generous action, than by any other method of expense; since the utmost which he can attain by the most elaborate selfishness, is the indulgence of some affection.

Now if life, without passion, must be altogether insipid and tiresome; let a man suppose that he has full power of modelling his own disposition, and let him deliberate what appetite or desire he would choose for the foundation of his happiness and enjoyment. Every affection, he would observe, when gratified by success, gives a satisfaction proportioned to its force and violence; but besides this advantage, common to all, the immediate feeling of benevolence and friendship, humanity and kindness, is sweet, smooth, tender, and agreeable, independent of all fortune and accidents. These virtues are besides attended with a pleasing consciousness or remembrance, and keep us in humour with ourselves as well as others; while we retain the agreeable reflection of having done our part towards mankind and society. And though all men show a jealousy of our success in the pursuits of avarice and ambition; yet are we almost sure of their good-will and good wishes, so long as we persevere in the paths of virtue, and employ ourselves in the execution of generous plans and purposes. What other passion is there where we shall find so many advantages united; an agreeable sentiment, a pleasing consciousness, a good reputation? But of these truths, we may observe, men are, of themselves, pretty much convinced; nor are they deficient in their duty to society, because they would not wish to be generous, friendly, and humane; but because they do not feel themselves such.

Treating vice with the greatest candour, and making it all possible concessions, we must acknowledge that there is not, in any instance, the smallest pretext for giving it the preference above virtue, with a view of self-interest; except, perhaps, in the case of justice, where a man, taking things in a certain light, may often seem to be a loser by his integrity. And though it is allowed that, without a regard to property, no society could subsist; yet according to the imperfect way in which human affairs are conducted, a sensible knave, in particular incidents, may think that an act of iniquity or infidelity will make a considerable addition to his fortune, without causing any considerable breach in the social union and confederacy. That HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY, may be a good general rule, but is liable to many exceptions; and he, it may perhaps be thought, conducts himself with most wisdom, who observes the general rule, and takes advantage of all the exceptions.

I must confess that, if a man think that this reasoning much requires an answer, it would be a little difficult to find any which will to him appear satisfactory and convincing. If his heart rebel not against such pernicious maxims, if he feel no reluctance to the thoughts of villainy or baseness, he has indeed lost a considerable motive to virtue; and we may expect that his practice will be answerable to his speculation. But in all ingenuous natures, the antipathy to treachery and roguery is too strong to be counter-balanced by any views of profit or pecuniary advantage. Inward peace of mind, consciousness of integrity, a satisfactory review of our own conduct; these are circumstances, very requisite to happiness, and will be cherished and cultivated by every honest man, who feels the importance of them.

Such a one has, besides, the frequent satisfaction of seeing knaves, with all their pretended cunning and abilities, betrayed by their own maxims; and while they purpose to cheat with moderation and secrecy, a tempting incident occurs, nature is frail, and they give into the snare; whence they can never extricate themselves, without a total loss of reputation, and the forfeiture of all future trust and confidence with mankind.

But were they ever so secret and successful, the honest man, if he has any tincture of philosophy, or even common observation and reflection, will discover that they themselves are, in the end, the greatest dupes, and have sacrificed the invaluable enjoyment of a character, with themselves at least, for the acquisition of worthless toys and gewgaws. How little is requisite to supply the necessities of nature? And in a view to pleasure, what comparison between the unbought satisfaction of conversation, society, study, even health and the common beauties of nature, but above all the peaceful reflection on one's own conduct; what comparison, I say, between these and the feverish, empty amusements of luxury and expense? These natural pleasures, indeed, are really without price; both because they are below all price in their attainment, and above it in their enjoyment.

Alonzo Fyfe · 05-13-2003, 03:15 PM

I shall return the money (as I have in relevant situations in the past), without expecting a reward, and without accepting one if it was offered.

Why?

For the long answer, I refer you to the Ethics Without God series that I am posting.

For the short answer, it is because I wish to do so.

Furthermore, I would defend it as the right thing to do. A person with good desires would want to return the money and not want a reward -- where "good desires" are themselves understood to be those desires which tend toward the fulfillment of desires generally.

If you want to know the gory details of this account, I again point you to the above mentioned series of posts.

echidna · 05-13-2003, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Whispers
Does the answer differ, if I really need the money to support my own family, or if I am wealthy and have no need for it?

The crux of the question depends on one�s interpretation of �need�. Do I �need� the $10,000 (say) because my BMW really really really needs upgrading ? Or because a loved one "needs" a liver transplant ?

To those who would unconditionally return the money, substitute a scenario where that money was the difference between life and death for a loved one.

No, I think there could be circumstances where I would keep it.

(And this is coming from someone still bruised from a domestic blue (argument) over a pair of $1500 ear-rings for f#$%^�s sake

)

Viti · 05-13-2003, 04:07 PM

I would return it. I have this voice in my head that tells me things(it sounds a lot like my Mom's voice

), and in this case it would tell me that the rightful owner probably worked hard for their cash and needs it and that only a huge ugly piece of shit would keep it from them. Then I would imagine a mother going through bills and being unable to pay them, and berating herself for losing her purse...and a child crying because its hungry. Yes, my conscience gets very dramatic on my ass.

Alonzo Fyfe · 05-13-2003, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by echidna
To those who would unconditionally return the money, substitute a scenario where that money was the difference between life and death for a loved one.

I do not think that anything is unconditional. If some space alien says, 'keep the bag or I will blow up the planet,' I will keep it.

If I knew it was drug money or gained through some other illicit activity, or part of a payoff as a cash bribe to a Senator, I would likely keep it.

Would I keep it for surgery for my wife? No. After all, maybe they were depending on the money for their child's surgery. I would return it, but accept the reward, and ask them to tell the newspaper so that the story about the person who returned the money even though his wife needed surgery would run in the weekend edition inspiring some philanthropist to donate the money for the surgery.

Yes, ultimately, it depends.

But, barring extraordinary circumstances, if I were to find that money, say, today on my way home from work, I would return it and accept no reward.

echidna · 05-13-2003, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alonzo Fyfe
But, barring extraordinary circumstances, if I were to find that money, say, today on my way home from work, I would return it and accept no reward.

Likewise.

Paperstreet · 05-13-2003, 06:18 PM

Money is overrated. I would rather see the happy look on the persons face then keep the money. I of course wouldn't decide this easily though. Hopefully I would come to my senses. The more money it is, the more tempting it would be, but in the end, I return it. A week from then, I would be carrying to much for one person -- a ton of money and a ton of guilt.

dangin · 05-14-2003, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Oxidizing Material
Perhaps the woman's idiot child chucked the purse out her vehicle window unbeknowest?

Said woman was an idiot for leaving it in the reach of idiot child.

As with everything I take this to a comparison with our animal bretheren. Are scavengers immoral for eating the food, left at a kill site, that they did nothing to secure other than find(they did not participate in the labor of the kill) They are eating a resource, provided and worked for by another. The original provider, may be off snoozing with a full belly, this does not mean that predator would not want to come back for leftovers the next morning, but alas, the scavengers have picked the site clean.

Say a T-Rex killed a duckbill(did they even live in the same era?) anyway, the elderly T-Rex kills the herbivore, but dies of a coronary at the same time due to her age, her crappy diet, and the exertion of chasing and killing the prey. Her nest is only one kilometer away, where her infant is starving to death.(she's old but still fertile) Are the scavengers immoral for eating both her, and her recently killed prey thus assuring the death of her offspring as well?

The same can be said of lion prides, or even caches of provisions stored in trees by squirrels and other animals that work for and store assets.

The only value in returning the asset that you have found is if there is a reward, either material or in esteem (which will eventually lead to a material reward as well) within the community from which you draw support.

And said eventual reward needs to outweigh the value of what you stood to gain by simply keeping the assets in the first place.

Simple survival mathematics. It's how we have evolved. But before I am accused of being too mercenary. This is a really silly example where keeping the assets is something that no one else would ever know about (it has no effect upon your position within your society and is thus neither social, nor antisocial, it is asocial) I am far more interested in helping others in my society when it is not an asocial activity, because this reaps benefit for me eventually, and that is what it is all about.

Alonzo Fyfe · 05-14-2003, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dangin
Are the scavengers immoral for eating both her, and her recently killed prey thus assuring the death of her offspring as well?

So, on your proposed standard, the guiding principle of morality is, "If I can find an example in nature of an animal that would do X, then it is permissible for me to do X."

Am I understanding you correctly?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-13-2003, 01:24 PM	#11
Oxidizing Material Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Somewhere where I don't know where I am Posts: 2,069	Perhaps the woman's idiot child chucked the purse out her vehicle window unbeknowest?

05-13-2003, 03:15 PM	#13
Alonzo Fyfe Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: 920B Milo Circle Lafayette, CO Posts: 3,515	I shall return the money (as I have in relevant situations in the past), without expecting a reward, and without accepting one if it was offered. Why? For the long answer, I refer you to the Ethics Without God series that I am posting. For the short answer, it is because I wish to do so. Furthermore, I would defend it as the right thing to do. A person with good desires would want to return the money and not want a reward -- where "good desires" are themselves understood to be those desires which tend toward the fulfillment of desires generally. If you want to know the gory details of this account, I again point you to the above mentioned series of posts.

05-13-2003, 04:07 PM	#15
Viti Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Down South Posts: 12,879	I would return it. I have this voice in my head that tells me things(it sounds a lot like my Mom's voice ), and in this case it would tell me that the rightful owner probably worked hard for their cash and needs it and that only a huge ugly piece of shit would keep it from them. Then I would imagine a mother going through bills and being unable to pay them, and berating herself for losing her purse...and a child crying because its hungry. Yes, my conscience gets very dramatic on my ass.

05-13-2003, 06:18 PM	#18
Paperstreet Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Maryland Posts: 175	Money is overrated. I would rather see the happy look on the persons face then keep the money. I of course wouldn't decide this easily though. Hopefully I would come to my senses. The more money it is, the more tempting it would be, but in the end, I return it. A week from then, I would be carrying to much for one person -- a ton of money and a ton of guilt.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.