INTERVIEW FOR CSE 2019
All ForumIAS members selected for CSE 2019 Personality Test must submit their details and DAF and register below to receive further instructions and guidance from ForumIAS. Click here to register now
INTERVIEW 2020 CHANNEL
ForumIAS Channel for Interview Preparation is now Active! Please join the channel by clicking here
We are hiring!

Robin Hood dilemma : How do you resolve it ?

edited October 2018 in Ethics
Robin Hood moral dilemma: If a waiter cleaning a hotel room prises open the locker in order to steal the the wealthy occupant’s wallet & discovers the occupant has stashed away goods stolen from others, does the theft of the wallet become more morally acceptable? Any views?
What will be difference in this situation between ethicially justifiable or morally justifiable?
«1

Comments

  • Robin Hood moral dilemma: If a waiter cleaning a hotel room prises open the locker in order to steal the the wealthy occupant’s wallet & discovers the occupant has stashed away goods stolen from others, does the theft of the wallet become more morally acceptable? Any views?
    What will be difference in this situation between ethicially justifiable or morally justifiable?
    thibkibg even of stealing itslef is unethical..there wont be moral justification also as stolen good again belong to someone else...anyways: utilitarian basis- greatest good from stolen- justified....kantian basis : categirical imperative and universalism: not justified......virtue ethics: theft is vice...unethical........
  • Robin Hood moral dilemma: If a waiter cleaning a hotel room prises open the locker in order to steal the the wealthy occupant’s wallet & discovers the occupant has stashed away goods stolen from others, does the theft of the wallet become more morally acceptable? Any views?
    What will be difference in this situation between ethicially justifiable or morally justifiable?
    Nope......it doesn't justify the act of stealing and will not be morally acceptable
  • Ethically it is not justifiable at all.Reasons-
    1.Kantian categorical imperative of universal maxim.It can 't be recommended to other agent
    2.Consequentialist doctrine.Consequences would be jail, beating and social obstraciztion etc
    3.Virtue ethics-shows appetitive nature of human instead of his wisdom
    You may want to argue for its being morally justifiable on following grounds:
    1.moral subjectivism -everybody and every culture has different values.
    2.Butler's conscience- his conscience may permit him to steal as wealth in question is not earned but stolen
    3.Retributive justice of punishing the wealthy man in this way.
    But then problem of doctrine of double effect, initegrity(doing right when nobody is seeing you),slippery slope etc occur.
    Therefore act is neither morally nor ethically justifiable.
    "Two wrongs can't make a wrong act right".
  • edited October 2018
    ...
  • edited October 2018
    First of all the question is not whether it is ethically justifiable or not.

    The question is Whether it becomes more morally acceptable?

    Scenario1: Theft from poor is gross , totally,morally unacceptable. Stealing from a beggar is the biggest sin to do.

    Scenario 2: Now stealing from a thief. What do we call it ? lesser sin than the 1st

    Between the two evils , isn't the second evil better ?
    Bhai your question said if it is morally acceptable.
    As far as upsc is concerned ethically justifiable is morally acceptable. Unethical conduct is not morally acceptable. If your morals are not in sync with organisational ethics then that's scoffed at. Your morals can supplement the ethics but not oppose it.
    So it is ethically not justifiable and if such a question comes you must also be clear that it is morally unacceptable.
    The most important ethic in a democracy is rule of law. This rule of law is justified because in a constitutional democracy the law represent will of people.
    Yes you can go into - but it's a tyranny of majority and all, but as far as upsc is concerned, you are applying for a job in democracy and it's ethics are derived from rule of law. So your temperament must be in sync with it as far as answers are concerned.
    Stop focussing on more or less. The law is broken - it is not justifiable

    Even on a PERSONAL level I believe Robin hood is unethical. For the same reason I believe batman is ethical because he never punishes the bad guys but let's law take its course
  • Remember - Mao, Stalin and Hitler were all Robin hoods of their people
  • Chori to chori hi hui na.waiter ke intentions se bhi nahi justify kar sakte.if you would have given scenario like waiter bhukha hai pichle 4 din ya uske bacche ka ilaaz karana hai etc then there may be some dilemma.
    But while cleaning, deviation of his conscience is not justifiable at all.There exists no dilemma in your question.
  • This was posted by Kaushik Basu on Twitter yesterday....one comment read "in which hotel waiters clean rooms" LOL
  • This was posted by Kaushik Basu on Twitter yesterday....one comment read "in which hotel waiters clean rooms" LOL
    :D yeah today only i guess...
Sign In or Join to comment.

Welcome!

We are a secret self-moderated community for Civil Services preparation. Feel free to join, start a discussion, answer a question or just to say Thank you.

Just dont spread the word ;)

Sign in or join with Facebook or Google