balancing principles is not the right method
Analizing prohibitions and apparent exceptions
An unforeseen effect may come from a mistake and is surely unwilled: it is not moral matter.
Balancing may bring to bad choices and voluntary bad actions, that is a bad method.
Contextual sensitivity is an argument which need specification, a case study.
Undoubtedly, suffering does exist, but what one suffers is not a moral issue, what one does act is.
Gemini-Bard's reply:
Analyzing Your Perspective
Your perspective raises several important points:
- Unforeseen Consequences: You emphasize that unforeseen consequences are not morally culpable. This is a valid point, as individuals cannot be held responsible for outcomes they could not reasonably anticipate.
- Balancing and Bad Choices: You're concerned that balancing competing moral principles might lead to bad choices. This is a valid concern, as sometimes difficult decisions involve weighing competing goods or evils.
- Contextual Sensitivity: You request a case study to illustrate the concept of contextual sensitivity. This is a helpful approach to understanding how moral principles can be applied in specific situations.
- Suffering and Moral Responsibility: You distinguish between suffering and moral responsibility. While suffering can be a consequence of moral actions, it's not necessarily a moral issue in itself.
Let's explore these points further:
Unforeseen Consequences:
- Mitigation: While individuals cannot be held morally responsible for unforeseen consequences, they can be held accountable for taking reasonable steps to mitigate potential harm.
- Due Diligence: This involves conducting thorough research, considering potential risks, and taking appropriate precautions.
Balancing Competing Principles:
- Hierarchies of Principles: In some cases, certain moral principles may be considered more fundamental than others. For example, the principle of non-maleficence (avoiding harm) might be prioritized over the principle of beneficence (doing good) in certain situations.
- Case-by-Case Analysis: Each situation requires a careful analysis of the specific principles involved and the potential consequences of different choices.
Contextual Sensitivity:
- Case Study: The Trolley Problem: A classic ethical dilemma involves a runaway trolley heading towards five people on the tracks. The only way to save them is to divert the trolley onto a side track, where it will kill one person. This illustrates the need to consider the specific context and consequences of different choices.
Suffering and Moral Responsibility:
- Moral Agency: While suffering can be a consequence of moral actions, it's important to distinguish between the suffering caused by intentional wrongdoing and the suffering that results from unintentional harm or external circumstances.
- Compassion and Relief: Moral principles often emphasize the importance of compassion and helping those who are suffering, regardless of the cause.