TED Conversations

Haley Goranson

Spiritual Being Having a Human Experience,

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Which is more important, to do right or to do good?

A rich man walks down the street and drop a 20 dollar bill. You know he will not even notice it is gone. On the side of the street sits a beggar who looks really hungry. The good thing is to give the money to the beggar, the right thing is to give it back to the man who dropped it.



- Maybe instead of taking this question , as a question of right and wrong or judgment, perhaps what we can take from this is that there are a variety of opinions and many people have different ideas of what is morally right. That is beautiful to me. This is just an example that good and right are almost undefinable, or at the least the definition is always changing for everyone.

Topics: money poverty
+8
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jan 9 2013: Anybody can sit and ponder the definitions of what right and good are for all of eternity and no one will end up being right or wrong on their views of the subject. At it's very core each subject of the matter is entirely subjective. I personally care to look at the situation more analytically rather than based on emotions. And doing so I can see a few basic outcomes to the situation, although not limited to only these listed.

    One, the person can give the twenty dollars back to the person who dropped it, not assuming whether that person is rich or not and you'll feel better for being kind enough to give it back. Two, you give it to the man who by appearance seems to be in a worse off situation than yourself. This situation will make you feel better about yourself because you potentially saved a life. A third outcome, is you pass on by not caring to give the twenty dollars to either of them, and hoping that the next person that notices the twenty dollars will make that decision. Here you come out the same as you went in.

    Now I personally view it as this, you can gain positive feelings from either of the first two options. And in this particular situation you can possibly satisfy both. So how can you make both parties happy? How do you give the twenty dollars back to its original owner and yet still potentially save a life, thus gaining double the positive feelings. Assuming that that man is in fact starving, you could then ask yourself, do you just feed them once only satisfying their hunger for a short period of time. Or do you help that person get a sustainable income in order to potentially feed them for a lifetime. A simple feed a man a fish, teach a man to fish scenario. And who knows how that person might react to such an act of kindness. They may go out and try to show others such acts of generosity.

    So as you can see, by not biasing your decision on the emotional ideas of right and good. You can potentially come out pleasing every one, including yourself.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.