[Hypothetical] Do The Right Thing or Do What is Necessary?

In this hypothetical scenario, we have no knowledge as to WHY the food was left there in the first place. How do we know it wasn't somebody "Paying it Forward"? A good Samaritan. You know there are people who actually do random acts of kindness, hard to believe in this day and age but it's true!

What would I do? I want to say that I would do the right thing, but in real life, if my family is starving, well I might have to pray for forgiveness.

(P.S) Latrell Sprewell : "I have a family to feed"!
.......
.......
.......

 

I would beat a man, probably senselessly, for an apple if I was really really hungry.

 

Dang, I can only imagine what you would do for a pear...
.......
.......
.......

 

You have to be really hungry or starving to know the correct answer. Remember there is an apex predator in all of you that is suppressed/satiated by society.

 

If you asked anybody who grew up in poverty in a 3rd world country, the answer is easy. Most, would take it in a heartbeat.

That doesn't mean that folks in 3rd world countries are not moral, you do what is needed to survive.

This is one of those hypotheticals that is not easy to answer unless you are really in that situation.

 

LOL Your friend has been playing The Walking Dead.

Spoiler

 

Necessary if I'm truly starving as is my family. Difference is how I get to being truly at the end of my rope. Even if it's not one of those scenarios where I spent my money on booze, hookers and gambling instead of actually on the well being of my family, would it really make a difference if I stole it to provide for a still starving family even though I'm the reason my family is starving in the first place? Or if I, along with my family were at the end of our ropes because of a lieu of tragic circumstances that crippled both me and my family to the point of needing to steal food to survive, absent of any addiction to any sort of vice.

I don't think it's right a family is starving. I don't think it's right to steal. However, if stealing fed a starving family without causing due harm to anyone in the process (which is impossible unless some well to do owner of said groceries has the extra income to dispose on stolen goods and the time go shopping again. Maybe you stole groceries, only to find there was medication in one of the bags, and it was for some person with cardiovascular or pulmonary issues. Or it's a single mom raising an autistic bipolar kid who needs his meds on a routine fixed schedule. If you and your family were truly starving, and you were living in the streets, you may just try and peddle the Rx for cash to spend on your next meal for you and your kids. The owner of these meds must have had insurance to cover most of the cost right? It won't be much of an inconvenience to steal Rx too.

It's a slippery slope to cross. Ideally, no person would be so impoverished that they couldn't at least fill their stomach up with nutritionally dense food. Unfortunately that's not the case. What's necessary wins for me.

 

Moral questions like this bore me. So I'm going to say this is actually not a moral question. But indeed proven by looking at other species

According to A Beautiful Mind, John Nash mathematically proved Adam Smith wrong

We succeed (like a wolf pack) by doing both what is right for us individually and for the group

In crisis, like a zombie apocalypse, this holds true even more.

 

I would beat hundreds of men for food if I was hungry. Simultaneously even.

 

Gross.

 

Family > Morals, values, ethics etc.

If you have children there is no argument here.

 

Thanks for fixing that for me.

 

i'm not saying you wouldnt do the right thing, i'm saying you don't know what hunger is

 

Honestly, I think I would return it but I haven't been in that position to know the desperation that lies behind it. In my opinion I think that answer would change if you was in that position but until then I would say return.

 

I would return it to the store since I have a receipt, then buy some crack.

 

I disagree with your assessment of what the right thing is.

 

id take half

 

Correct. SwoLy is off base. The right thing is to let the starving person eat. Money and ownership do not supersede health and survival of others. If someone is to the point where they have to steal to eat then they need it a hell of a lot more than the person who paid for it if they have the same value system. That wasn't clarified in the original post.