Someone's benefiting from having done harm to another person is morally justifiable only if the person who was harmed...

yckim2180 on June 19, 2020

Hi, just wanted to follow up on my last question.

Dalton on August 2 at 08:00PM

Here are my thoughts:

Only If introduces a Necessary Condition

A is incorrect because Sonia ultimately did not benefit from the harm caused as they both had to stay after school.

B is incorrect because he did nothing to harm anyone.

C is correct because Wesley knowingly harmed Max by not telling him about the side effects, and he benefited from doing so because he was able to conduct the study (had he told Max about the side effects he may not have agreed to participate) thus his actions meet the criteria for being morally unjustified. C fulfills our S&N statement as Max was unaware of the harm that could be caused and thus could not consent => Therefore Wesley was Unjustified in having harmed him (this is the contrapositive of the S&N statement).

D is incorrect because Rodger's mother knew what harm was being done and consented to it anyways therefore Rodger is morally justified in receiving the transplant.

E is out of scope.

Emil-Kunkin on August 7 at 04:26PM

Agreed here on why C is correct!