| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"JCarr" |
| Date: |
22 May 2005 06:52:36 PM |
| Object: |
Ethical Question |
Should an Individual making a sandwich in a kitchen feel obligated to
procure a glass of juice for another individual, of whom his has a
standard roommate partnership agreement with, under the premise that he
was "up anyways"?
.
|
|
| User: "Dare" |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
23 May 2005 10:23:07 AM |
|
|
"JCarr" <jcarr23@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message
news:8X8ke.1446706$Xk.229277@pd7tw3no...
Should an Individual making a sandwich in a kitchen feel
obligated to procure a glass of juice for another individual,
of whom his has a standard roommate partnership agreement
with, under the premise that he was "up anyways"?
Seems to me that it is not mandatory that the sandwich-maker
procure and deliver the juice, but he might want to consider
what would be in his own best interest...both now and in the future:
Future- possible reciprocal action by roommate to provide
a similar service for him when needed or requested.
Now- if he refuses and the roommate decides to get up and
procure the juice for himself, what else might he do that
could be troublesome...like spill or break something or
gobble down the last bit of something the sandwich-maker
wants for himself? (Let sleeping dogs lie?) ;-)
Be ready to re-evaluate the decision if the situation arises again,
based on results from the previous action.
Thanks,
Dare
.
|
|
|
| User: "In my evolving opinion" |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
23 May 2005 11:42:48 AM |
|
|
Hi Dare,
Have you been posting lately? Missed yours.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dare" |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
23 May 2005 01:38:33 PM |
|
|
"In my evolving opinion" <no@email.com>
Hi Dare,
Have you been posting lately? Missed yours.
Hi...thanks.
Took a break for a while...
hope to see if my opinions evolved during that time. :-)
Thanks for the greeting,
Dare
.
|
|
|
| User: "cat rancher" |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
24 May 2005 08:11:13 PM |
|
|
"Dare" <clydadare@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d6t834$4ble$1@news3.infoave.net...
: "In my evolving opinion" <no@email.com>
: > Hi Dare,
: > Have you been posting lately? Missed yours.
: >
:
: Hi...thanks.
: Took a break for a while...
: hope to see if my opinions evolved during that time. :-)
:
: Thanks for the greeting,
: Dare
I was the one who, under a different handle, posted that
I was disappointed that your posts were not from a man,
which I said would have been encouraging for the males.
I changed my mind. It is quite nice to have such a pleasant
and thoughtful person of either gender, here. If you lived
near me, I would ask you to lunch.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dare" |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
25 May 2005 08:14:07 AM |
|
|
"cat rancher" <goodidea1950SPAM-SPAM@hotmail.com> wrote:
I was the one who, under a different handle, posted that
I was disappointed that your posts were not from a man,
which I said would have been encouraging for the males.
I changed my mind. It is quite nice to have such a pleasant
and thoughtful person of either gender, here. If you lived
near me, I would ask you to lunch.
That could have been an interesting conversation!
Many Thanks,
Dare
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "In my evolving opinion" |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
22 May 2005 09:05:07 PM |
|
|
"JCarr" <jcarr23@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message
news:8X8ke.1446706$Xk.229277@pd7tw3no...
: Should an Individual making a sandwich in a kitchen feel obligated to
: procure a glass of juice for another individual, of whom his has a
: standard roommate partnership agreement with, under the premise that he
: was "up anyways"?
That question came up a few weeks ago. My opinion was that the
sandwich making individual was under an obligation to get juice for
the ***** unless the getting of such liquid would project an incorrect
impression that the lazy ***** was a likeable person, so the correct
procedure would be to get the juice and say, 'here's your juice, you
lazy, good for nothing, *****. I didn't want to hear you ***** for a
week, so I gave in."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "tooly" |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
23 May 2005 05:12:09 AM |
|
|
"JCarr" <jcarr23@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote in message
news:8X8ke.1446706$Xk.229277@pd7tw3no...
Should an Individual making a sandwich in a kitchen feel obligated to
procure a glass of juice for another individual, of whom his has a
standard roommate partnership agreement with, under the premise that he
was "up anyways"?
I realize this is probably just for fun...but anything can be given pause
for deeper consideration I suppose.
Is this a question about altruism? What does one gain by expending energy
that does not, on the first take, appear to be for 'self'? The answer might
be found in the idea of 'investment'...seeking greater returns at some
future date by delaying self gratification now. The energy expired in
procuring the glass of juice for a friend might be said to be transversal,
as a 'potential' regained energy in the general attitudes of the benefactor
toward self. Of course, like all investment, there is a risk and the
potential energies derived [as returned simbionic friendliness, help,
support etc], 'stored' in the benefactor of the juice, might not bear out.
Judgment always comes to bear...like any good investment should be. Does
the roomy 'deserve' such treatment for example? What is his/her past
performance in returning such little nicities?
Of course, some of the investment might be seen as into one's own self as a
matter of one's attitude toward self. 'Heck, I'm a nice guy...I'll fight
for myself harder now because "I" deserve it", blah, blah...versus, 'Geeze,
I'm such a creep; can't even get someone a glass of juice'...yada yada.
Self esteem measures as the highest resolve for personal survival [I think
general psychology bears this out]. The lower the esteem, the more self
destructive behaviors are likely etc.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel T." |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
23 May 2005 06:22:12 AM |
|
|
In article <8X8ke.1446706$Xk.229277@pd7tw3no>,
JCarr <jcarr23@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote:
Should an Individual making a sandwich in a kitchen feel obligated to
procure a glass of juice for another individual, of whom his has a
standard roommate partnership agreement with, under the premise that he
was "up anyways"?
This is much like the classic prisoner's dilemma, and the solution is
the same. A tit-for-tat strategy is the best solution, did he get you
something the last time he was "up anyway"?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sir Frederick" |
|
| Title: Re: Ethical Question |
22 May 2005 08:48:16 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 22 May 2005 23:52:36 GMT, JCarr <jcarr23@gmailREMOVE.com> wrote:
Should an Individual making a sandwich in a kitchen feel obligated to
procure a glass of juice for another individual, of whom his has a
standard roommate partnership agreement with, under the premise that he
was "up anyways"?
Superficially, probably not.
Also, perhaps you should pursue living alone.
All primate folk are not 'created' equal. That includes
our social brain functions. Thus generalities might
not address your particular "Individuals".
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
