What is responsible?

Was it a responsible act to watch this man’s computer?
How does one determine what is responsible and what is not?
Here is how I determine the right thing to do:
First – is there a moral law dictating the behavior? If there is, I follow it. I do not know of any hard-fast law that says “Though shall watch thy neighbor’s computer when they go to the copy store.” so….
Second, if no law, is there a principle that I can derive from an existing moral law that applies in this situation. There is a moral directive to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Would I want someone to watch my computer if I was in a similar circumstance? Does this apply to this situation? hmmm…
Third, if there is no moral law and it is difficult to find a specific principle derived from a moral law, then I use the context of the situation to determine what to do. What was the context in this situation…was she on a 15 minute break from work with a boss or fellow employees that needed her services? Was she on her own time with no commitments?
Only by fully knowing the context of the situation can one determine what is the responible thing to do.
I love the video. It sure makes you think, and it points to the fact that there is always a cost for self-sacrifice, and often you do not get any tangible reward.
In my life, I have found that whenever I have sacrificed my own wants and desires for others, with no expectation of gaining anything from it, I have always gained…sometimes tangibly, sometimes not.

Jeff Whitefield | 2 years, 1 month ago
Add Comment | Post Reply

Lets Keep it Simple

I have no problem watching something for someone. It is human nature, we all like to help when we can. There are limits, in this case 15 minutes is fair. If I agreed to watch the laptop and it was time for me to leave I would go to the establishment manager and tell them what happened and then leave. It then becomes the obligation of the establishement, regardless of what the employee would like you to think.

Bob Kirton | 2 years ago
Add Comment | Post Reply

Ambivalent

I was completely unmoved by this movie. It was unrealistic to expect someone to watch a valuable object for a long period of time. The expected consequence of this action is always loss of the item because people are inherently bad.

The movie fails to even pose a moral problem because the most common action, and in fact response, would be to call it quits after 15 minutes and turn the items into the manager. Thus the movie only seems to prove that there is a time limit to the good graces of strangers to which I say…..duh!

Geoff Blair | 2 years ago
Add Comment | Post Reply

Responsible for the Irresponsible?

I’ve read with interest the comments about this movie. One question that I think deserves further discussion is how far does our moral obligation to be responsible extend to those who are acting irresponsibly? It is irresponsible in my judgment to ask a stranger to watch a valuable personal item for any more than a couple of moments e.g. the time it takes to go to the rest room or retrieve a sugar packet at the counter. Certainly, it’s irresponsible to physically leave the premises and not return when promised. In the film, I think it was responsible for the initial “table guardian” to have agreed to watch the man’s computer. My feeling is that the bounds of her responsibility could reasonably have been reached when the man failed to return within 15-30 minutes or so from when he said he would. After that, she could have walked away and the man would then suffer the potential consequences of his irresponsible behavior e.g. a stolen laptop. I think the determination of the “responsibility boundary” in the face of irresponsible behavior is largely contextual. Many variables need to be considered, including will innocent parties be harmed if I leave my post. For instance, if a neighbor mom says, “Can you watch my kids for a hour?” and doesn’t return until the next day, the responsibility boundary would extend to the return of the mother.

Steven Westerdahl | 2 years ago
Add Comment | Post Reply

What is responsible???

In general I watch people’s belongings for them in restaurants, airports, etc. I have asked people to watch my things. Sometimes they were watched and other times not even though the person agreed to watch them, and I was gone only momentarily. In all but one instance, the belongings were there when I came back even if the person wasn’t. In that instance I asked someone to hold my monopod while I was taking some photographs. I came back a couple of minutes later, no person, no monopod. It was no where to be found, not even in the lost and found. This was a 40 year old woman who must have taken it home….Go figure. So I guess it comes down to trust and good karma and whether you are willing to lose that which you have entrusted to others. if you are not, don’t leave it.

Do we have a responsibility? Yes. Is it the best thing for us and others to fulfill that responsibility? Yes. Can we be assured that others feel the same way even if they appear reliable? No. Leaving one’s computer for over 2 hours is over the top. he must have had good karma.

Jan Newman MD | 1 year, 11 months ago
Add Comment | Post Reply

Mixed up feelings

…but not on my part! Some think “people are inherently evil” and another “people generally want to do good”. What about me? I would like to be helpful but not to a terrorist! Would I ask someone to do something like this for me, in good faith? I doubt it! Unless I knew that person. Why? The trust factor!
If someone asked to watch something valuable like that I would be suspicious because I don’t find it likely when there’s no acquaintance. No chance. I might be abetting a fool — or a terrorist. That’s not being responsible, friendly or in any way wise.

Alvin Rodriguez | 1 year, 9 months ago
Add Comment | Post Reply

Someone else will

Many people assume that it is always someone who will take the lead of responsibility leaving them off of having to think about being responsible. When someone asks people to give, someone or some persons are always relying on the “someone else” who will do it. Someone never taught this guy about what it means to be responsible, therefore he would exhibit a character flaw that would make him insensitive to another’s need to hold dear what it means to be truly responsible. One, the first woman could have promised she would meet someone at a certain time. She evidently, extended her stay as long as she could, because she accepted the responsibility of the promise she made to this guy. Soon the responsibility went from one person to five people. And soon as this guy returns as if there was “no harm no foul”, he doesn’t even show genuine remorse for his actions. Just acts as if its no problem. Well it is evident this kind of person would not make a good pal because he would always be concerned about his balance of goods on the scale of friendship. He would never regard the imbalance because of his greed. He would just assume it is the responsibility of another. This guy is a real jerk.

Elizabeth Wilson | 1 year, 7 months ago
Add Comment | Post Reply

 1 2 > (2 pages)