Very Simple Ethics Question

[David Sklansky]

Let's say you are one of those extreme conservative types who believe it is totally ethical to not share any wealth you may have with someone less fortunate. Even though there is absolutely no justification for that disparity in wealth. You are a lazy bum type who won the lottery. The fellow who is asking for a dollar is a wonderful father, well educated, but was born with a physical disability that keeps him from getting a job.

After you have turned him down with a lecture on politics, is it unethical for him to non violently pick your pocket?

[A_C_Slater]

Yes.

He shouldn't go around impregnating women if he's not able to support the kid. Also, his kids may be sub-human like him, and then there is a big eugenics issue involved.

[xniNja]

How about violently pick your pocket? Or kill you and take your roll?

Answer: Yes, it's unethical because a disabled, wonderful, well educated father would be lowering his own personal standards by picking your pocket in any way.

[BluffTHIS!]

Look David, why don't you just get to the heart of the matter with these ethics posts, and make a general post about whether ethics are relative and thus do the ends sometimes justify the means.

[James Boston]

Where are you going with this? Would it be ethical if he non-violently robbed your house? I stealing ethical? No.

[RJT]

Not sure ‘bout that. But, I am sure and Al Capone Jr. (he posts mostly in the B & M thread) would agree with me that, it would be ok for him to kick you(me) in the nuts.

By the way, didn’t Victor Hugo (can’t remember which thread he posts in) address this issue a while back?

[EightStuda]

"Non-violently" picking someone's pocket seems like a grave contradiction. Also maybe this crippled bum shouldn't have had kids. I don't see where the rich guy has an obligation to help the less fortunate.

-Dimitri

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see where the rich guy has an obligation to help the less fortunate.

-Dimitri

[/ QUOTE ]

Then answer the question. Why is the less fortunate guy under any obligation to help the rich guy by not robbing him?

BTW, Since Sklansky has proved that sins of ommision count the same as sins of commission, does this guy get credit from God for a good deed by ommision (not robbing him). If your a thief, do you get as much credit for not robbing someone of $20 as you would for giving someone $20.

[xniNja]

Wait a minute. Assume I grant you this theoretical framework, Sklansky "proved" that sins of omission count the same as sins of commission? How so? Say your base level of "karma" is 10.

Say you kill, that's -10 Karma. So now you have 0.
Say you don't kill, you're still at 10. 10-10=0 for a net change of 0.
Say you save a life instead, that's +10 Karma, now you have 20.
Say you don't save a life. You still have 10 points of Karma for net change 0.

Now, my argument is that the above "proof" can be no less valid than saying Killing = -10, and Letting one die = -10, as we are arbitrarily assigning the payouts. (Hey game theory came in useful for once)

[einbert]

I believe the answer to this question lies in another question:

"What are his alternatives?"