Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Therefore the bystander has not made the child worse off ... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→It is not clear that failing to rescue a drowning child harms the child.

    Therefore the bystander has not made the child worse off relative to that baseline.

    Justice & PunishmentMoral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityJustice & Punishment

    Connections

    1 topic

    Rights & Liberty2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Moral Responsibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    It is not clear that failing to rescue a drowning child harms the child.Relative to the baseline of a world where the bystander was never present, the c...The bystander's absence would not have changed the child's outcome.Whether a failure to rescue constitutes harm depends on the chosen baseline.

    Similar

    The bystander's absence would not have changed the child's outcome.82%Relative to the baseline of a world where the bystander was never pres...75%The child's sickness does not make it appropriate for onlookers to adm...71%It is not clear that failing to rescue a drowning child harms the chil...69%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: mill-moral-political
    View source passageHide passage
    In discussing enforceable duties to give evidence or Samaritan aid, Mill claims that the failure to confer benefits constitutes harm. But it is not in general true that the failure to provide benefits always counts as a harm. In many cases it seems not to. You would benefit me by transferring all your savings to my bank account (let us assume); it doesn’t follow that your failure to do so harms me. Why not? Presumably, because we assess harms counterfactually: if x harms me, it makes me signific

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective