It has been claimed that an action is morally good only if it benefits another person and was performed with that int...
PeterCullMay 4, 2021
Intended to cause harm vs Cause harm
In the stimulus, it doesn’t say that it needs to cause harm, only that it needs to intend to cause harm. I don’t understand how A is not the answer, because whether it brought them closer together or not, the intent was to cause harm. I don’t understand how you can get from the stimulus the need for actual harm when it stimulus just says that harm needs to be intended.
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
I also don't understand how we can rule out answer choice A.
MB--> HI or RFLCH.
Just because the letter received did not cause the harm intended, wasn't Pamela's letter reasonably intended to cause harm? I still chose E but would like to understand how to eliminate an answer choice like A!
RemeSeptember 20, 2024
repost !!! for an answer
Intended to cause harm vs Cause harm
In the stimulus, it doesn’t say that it needs to cause harm, only that it needs to intend to cause harm. I don’t understand how A is not the answer, because whether it brought them closer together or not, the intent was to cause harm. I don’t understand how you can get from the stimulus the need for actual harm when it stimulus just says that harm needs to be intended.
Emil-KunkinSeptember 23, 2024
The passage actually does say that we are only talking about the subset of actions that cause harm. The second clause (right after the semicolon) tells us that of actions that do cause harm, they are morally bad under certain circumstances. We don't know anything about actions that do not cause harm.
