So Why is Stealing Wrong Again?

[The4Aces]

I think it is wrong because if you are a citizen of a country and obtain the benifits of a country then you should fallow the laws set up by the country or be prepaired to pay the concequesnces that come from your actions.

[snowden719]

although there is more to it than this, i think the most basic reason it is wrong is that if you were in his situation, you wouldn;t want him to steal for you, or at a very minimum you would have good reason to not want him to steal from you, and since that is the case you should take his reasons to be normative

[PorscheNGuns]

Because regardless of whether or not the stealing causes suffering, if everyone stole then any form of cooperative human society would not exist, and we would all live like individual wild animals protecting our own territory and possessions.

Therefore if one person steals, it must be deemed wrong and punished harshly so that others are persuaded not to steal.

I thought human beings figured this out thousands of years ago...?

-Matt

Why doesn't the poor man ask his neighbor for help?
Why would he choose to steal before he made an honest request of his neighbor??
Nothing on this Earth 'belongs' to us, everything has been GIVEN to us to use (and ultimately abuse).
Is stealing or looting the only choice?
If you are refering to the people affected by the hurricane, it would be redundant to take anything other than foodstuffs , bodily hydrating liquids and clothing. Why would you think you needed a big screen television with no electricity? What good is jewelry to you if you are starving, you can't barter it for food due to the fact that no one has any food to barter. Also is it really stealing if the goods were actually paid for, even if you weren't the one paying for them? I'm sure the insurance hated this storm the most of anyone.

[David Sklansky]

"although there is more to it than this, i think the most basic reason it is wrong is that if you were in his situation, you wouldn;t want him to steal for you, or at a very minimum you would have good reason to not want him to steal from you, and since that is the case you should take his reasons to be normative"

But this argument and others like it could be used to say stealing would be wrong even to save your life. Thus they are not allowed because I am stipulating that you agree such stealing is acceptable.

[lehighguy]

Morals a human creations. They are made because we derive satisfaction from living by thier principles. Even if obeying them prevents us from meeting physical wants/needs we gain psycological benefits from believing we follow a moral code. Following a moral code gives someone a sense of ego, like they are different from everyone else. It gives them a sense of self worth. It justifies thier existence. These are powerful psycological incentives to act morally. So it can really be broken down into an equation:

When
Psycological Benefit > Physical Benefit
person A acts morally.

Thus, morality is simple game theory in which the players try to maximize thier own personal gain. What determines "benefit" values. Well that's more complicated. Each person is a sum of thier experiences, genetics, and for the more religous thier soul. As a result some people put a higher value on morals then others. People also devise different moral codes to suit thier different tastes, just as people enjoy different flavors of ice cream. Even a mobster lives by "mob ethics".

Even those we would consider completely immoral, such as serial killers, are acting within the confines of the above game. They have some overwhelming psycological need to kill and they are willing to risk violence, capture, prosecution and a variety of other risks to meet that psycological need.

[HDPM]

There are a lot of holes in your scenario. First, anybody who takes something in an emergency must be willing to pay restitution for it later. If because of your bad planning you steal some food and clothes to survive, fine, but you must be willing, at the time you take it, to pay for it later. If you think you have some absolute right to it you are an immoral thief. I think human life takes precedence over other considerations in an emergency, but for reasons I discuss later human life requires freedom from theft to survive in a proper sense. So you can't just steal without acknowledging the obligation to pay restitution regardless of circumstance. Even if you later can't pay it back, it makes a difference to me whether you believe in the moral obligation to pay it back or think you are entitled to the property without compensation.

The desperate guy working hard is a thief if he steals from the rich playboy. Too bad his life sucks. He should ask for help, but if no help is forthcoming he has no right to steal.

Reasons. Morality is a system to allow people to live as human beings should live. Many disagree on what that means. However, morality must support survival of the human way of life. Humans can't live properly without property rights. This is because all property, and life itself, comes from the hard work and dedication of individuals. Nobody has a right to force another person to work for him. Theft does this because in effect you are forcing another human being to work for you without remuneration. That is morally wrong. It takes longer to fully set forth the basis for this, so David will have to be satisfied with my shorthand post. But the essence of it is to have a system where people have individual rights and are protected from savage behavior. Theft is taking people's labor by force which limits their ability to survive. The thief has no claim to others' property because of his own inadequacy.

I didn't read all the posts, so if anyone agreed previously, good for you. Because we are right. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[HDPM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The real reasons it's morally wrong is because it's an attack on society. Society needs ownership in order to function. When theft is rampant, what is the point of industry.

[/ QUOTE ]One might suggest that if there are needy people, society has failed. Which is worse: stealing when in need, or having excess and not sharing it with those in need?

[/ QUOTE ]

Stealing and it's not close.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The real reasons it's morally wrong is because it's an attack on society. Society needs ownership in order to function. When theft is rampant, what is the point of industry.

[/ QUOTE ]One might suggest that if there are needy people, society has failed. Which is worse: stealing when in need, or having excess and not sharing it with those in need?

[/ QUOTE ]

Stealing and it's not close.

[/ QUOTE ]Really? I think that is a sad commentary on our society. I might agree that stealing is worse, but it must be close. Compassion, I suppose, is not valued very highly in American society.

[ QUOTE ]
Reasons. Morality is a system to allow people to live as human beings should live. Many disagree on what that means. However, morality must support survival of the human way of life. Humans can't live properly without property rights. This is because all property, and life itself, comes from the hard work and dedication of individuals.

[/ QUOTE ]Humans can live without property rights. You must define "live properly" if you want to make an agument that humans cannot live properly witout property rights.

Very few indiviuals can live at all entirely on their own. I imagine it would be just as easy to argue that live itself comes from the hard work of groups of people. Without collective works we would all be the hunter-gathers of thousands of years ago.