Do you believe an action can be considered immoral if no one is harmed by it, and if so, why?
by 
Magenta
ANSWERS: 7
-
Yes, I think it's immoral whether anyone was harmed or not. Every moment of our lives we have opportunities to do something motivated by good values, and every moment that we don't do that is an opportunity lost forever. We can't get it back. Additionally, the actions we take are based upon the actions that have gone before. One immoral act can easily lead to others if one becomes engaged in trying to cover up the initial immoral act by lying or constructing a web of deceit. I guess the point is, that lone immoral act that didn't harm anyone is not in a vacuum.
-
Not if no one could be harmed by it, no. But if someone could be harmed by it, but didn't happen to this time. Dangerous pranks, for example. Getting away with it once is likely to encourage other people, and you are likely to repeat it as well. But if there is no prospect of anybody ever being harmed, then it cannot be immoral.
-
No, not really. I mean, if no one's hurt by something, then it's not bad, and if it isn't bad, then I fail to see how it can be classafied as 'immoral'. However, there may be some situation I can not imagine where a harmless action is indeed an 'immoral' one, however I can not for the life of me think of one.
-
The problem is in where you percieve the harm. If you are incredibly self centered than you look at an act as immoral only if it harms YOU. Most people object to acts that harm others directly and many are against acts which harm animal and plants. a variety of people view acts which harm the eco-system as immoral. Almost everybody draws the line somewhere. After-all we must consume something that was living inorder to survive.
-
I believe in God, he sets my standards. If I were to have sex with my husband before we were married, it would be considered "immoral" in the eyes of God and it would cause him hurt. That is why I waited until I was married to have sex with my love. Just because you don't see or know about the ramificaitons of an immoral act, doesn't make it any less harmful.
-
"Harm" is such a vague term. As was said in other answers, we don't live in a vacuum, and so every action we take affects someone else in some way. My personal definition of "immoral" is based not so much on harm as it is on force. For example, if you assault, rape, trespass, or steal from somebody, you've harmed them. This is an immoral act because you've committed force against them. On the other hand, if you go to the mall and find a close parking spot, you've "harmed" the person behind you who had intended to take that spot. Because of your act of taking that spot, the other person now has a longer walk from their car to the mall entrance than they otherwise would have had to because of your actions. But this "harm" is not an immoral act because you haven't committed force against anyone. (This example doesn't apply to Handicaped, or otherwise restricted, parking spaces.)
-
well harm has to also include mental, but no, it's ok, as long as no one is hurt(human that is)
HungryGuy RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC