[Tom Bishop]

So credit fraud is your solution to curbing criminal behavior?

I gave no solutions for curbing criminal behavior. I gave an observation that performing an action like this to force your morality on events and deprive one party of resources is selfish.

[Rama Set]

Ownership of personal property is a moral issue?

[Tom Bishop]

Ownership of personal property is a moral issue?

A system of limited resources where some people own more than other people, causing them hardship, is a moral issue.

[Rama Set]

Sounds like your issue is not ownership but disparity between those who own more than they need and those who do not have enough to get by.

[Tom Bishop]

Sounds like your issue is not ownership but disparity between those who own more than they need and those who do not have enough to get by.

Yes, and by giving the card to the authorities rather than letting nature take its course he selfishly imposed his morals on an event to deprive others of resources. It is no different than a tourist on safari saving a Zebra's life.

[Rushy]

This thread has been Bishop'd.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Why did you give the credit card to the proper authorities rather than leaving it on the ground for a criminal to find? Those criminals need to put food on their plates too.

Is it because YOU felt it was the right thing to do? Is it because YOU wanted to impose your morals of justice and altruism by taking action, rather than letting nature take its course? Is it because YOU know the cardholder of unknown integrity deserves the money more than a desperate criminal, of whom you know nothing about?

It's all about you and how you think things should be, forcing your morals onto events. Selfish.

This is some high quality Bishop. Tom, we live in a society where we have norms and standards. One of those norms is that people have the rights to their own property. Not to mention any person with half a brain cancels a lost credit card if they can't find it, making your whole tangent about "desperate criminals" irrelevant. (That is not to even mention that credit card fraud is both against society's norms and my personal morals.)

Yes, and by giving the card to the authorities rather than letting nature take its course he selfishly imposed his morals on an event to deprive others of resources. It is no different than a tourist on safari saving a Zebra's life.

Er, except that both society and myself see it very differently. In fact, I think you'd be one of the only people to accept that analogy as legitimate.

[Rama Set]

This thread has been Bishop'd.

And he is winning by a landslide.

[Saddam Hussein]

Why did you give the credit card to the proper authorities rather than leaving it on the ground for a criminal to find? Those criminals need to put food on their plates too.

Is it because YOU felt it was the right thing to do? Is it because YOU wanted to impose your morals of justice and altruism by taking action, rather than letting nature take its course? Is it because YOU know the cardholder of unknown integrity deserves the money more than a desperate criminal, of whom you know nothing about?

It's all about you and how you think things should be, forcing your morals onto events. Selfish.

This is some high quality Bishop. Tom, we live in a society where we have norms and standards. One of those norms is that people have the rights to their own property. Not to mention any person with half a brain cancels a lost credit card if they can't find it, making your whole tangent about "desperate criminals" irrelevant. (That is not to even mention that credit card fraud is both against society's norms and my personal morals.)

The fact that society agrees with you is irrelevant.  You are nevertheless pushing morality that you agree with onto people who don't agree with it.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Why did you give the credit card to the proper authorities rather than leaving it on the ground for a criminal to find? Those criminals need to put food on their plates too.

Is it because YOU felt it was the right thing to do? Is it because YOU wanted to impose your morals of justice and altruism by taking action, rather than letting nature take its course? Is it because YOU know the cardholder of unknown integrity deserves the money more than a desperate criminal, of whom you know nothing about?

It's all about you and how you think things should be, forcing your morals onto events. Selfish.

This is some high quality Bishop. Tom, we live in a society where we have norms and standards. One of those norms is that people have the rights to their own property. Not to mention any person with half a brain cancels a lost credit card if they can't find it, making your whole tangent about "desperate criminals" irrelevant. (That is not to even mention that credit card fraud is both against society's norms and my personal morals.)

The fact that society agrees with you is irrelevant.  You are nevertheless pushing morality that you agree with onto people who don't agree with it.

But I'm not pushing my morality. If you consider it moral to let a child starve, and I feed a starving child, am I also pushing my morality on you? Quit trying to bring irrelevant parties into the discussion.

[Rushy]

I am selfish. There. I said it.  Please donate below.

[Rama Set]

Why did you give the credit card to the proper authorities rather than leaving it on the ground for a criminal to find? Those criminals need to put food on their plates too.

Is it because YOU felt it was the right thing to do? Is it because YOU wanted to impose your morals of justice and altruism by taking action, rather than letting nature take its course? Is it because YOU know the cardholder of unknown integrity deserves the money more than a desperate criminal, of whom you know nothing about?

It's all about you and how you think things should be, forcing your morals onto events. Selfish.

This is some high quality Bishop. Tom, we live in a society where we have norms and standards. One of those norms is that people have the rights to their own property. Not to mention any person with half a brain cancels a lost credit card if they can't find it, making your whole tangent about "desperate criminals" irrelevant. (That is not to even mention that credit card fraud is both against society's norms and my personal morals.)

The fact that society agrees with you is irrelevant.  You are nevertheless pushing morality that you agree with onto people who don't agree with it.

You are fabricating someone who does not agree with it. Ben gave a credit card back to someone who lost it.  Two people are directly involved. If the person refused the credit card's return you could say it was pushed on them, but otherwise this is not areal dilemma. As has been agreed to elsewhere in this thread, the moral issue is a disparity of ownership, not ownership itself. Bearing these two facts in mind, no one can rightly say Ben was pushing his moral agenda.

[Ghost Spaghetti]

Why does it seem that everyone in this discussion forgets the empirical fact that we have empathy?  You can genuinely connect with another's suffering and wish for the other not to have that happen. Just because there is a personal element to this experience does not mean that it is not motivated by a desire for the others suffering to cease.

We have empathy which is one of the reasons that we do good things in a selfish way. I see someone being beaten up, this makes me feel bad because I know that they feel bad about it. I then have a consideration in whether to get involved. If I do something I may be beaten up, too and thus will feel bad, but if I walk away then I'll know that the victim still feels bad and so will I - with the added pain of guilt on top of it.

If I jump in and save the victim from being beaten up because I don't want to feel bad, is the victim going to be any less grateful because my motives weren't pure and selfless?

[Rama Set]

By definition, sympathy requires one to consider another's viewpoint, which is about as unselfish an action as I can think of. There is a big difference, in my mind, between action that is only motivated by personal concerns, what I would say is selfish, and one that simultaneously alleviates personal concerns and the concerns of others. The latter's character is defined by its reliance on others, without some selfless component, there is no satisfaction in many cases.