It has been claimed that an action is morally good only if it benefits another person and was performed with that int...

Victoria on July 28, 2020

Hi @Balwant,

Happy to help!

The stimulus tells us that an action is morally good only if it benefits another person and was performed with that intention.

MG --> BP and PI
Not BP or Not PI --> Not MG

We also learn that an action that harms another person is morally bad either if such harm was intended or if reasonable forethought would have shown that the action was likely to cause harm.

HI or RFCH --> MB
Not MB --> Not HI and Not RFCH

Answer choice (A) is incorrect because it does not conform to the principle. While Pamela did intend to cause harm to Edward and his friend, the letter did not end up causing harm. The principle tells us that, if harm was intended, then an action that HARMS ANOTHER is morally bad. As this action did not harm Edward or his friend, it was not morally bad.

Answer choice (E) is correct because it does conform to the principle. We know that an action that causes harm to another is morally bad if it was reasonably foreseeable that the action was likely to cause harm. It is reasonably foreseeable that failing to supervise a three-year-old playing near a street could result in harm; therefore, despite the fact that Jonathan intended no harm, his action was morally bad as it satisfied one of the two alternative sufficient conditions and it caused harm to his niece.

Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any further questions.

Balwant on July 31, 2020

This makes sense. Thank you