Moral Situation

[Visirale]

Exactly. All I have to go by is what you've posted in this thread. I believe you referred to yourself as an "unethical @$$hole." Just taking you at your word.

Perhaps I should clarify. I don't subscribe to the set of ethics that a majority of this country does (the same majority that elected W). I am a libertarian so usually my concern for others is zero, or close to it as long as it doesn't hurt me or my loved ones. My primary concern is myself and my family/friends. I'm not a part of the group that determines their worth by some set of morals or credos. I do have a moral set, but the average American would probably disagree with a lot of what I think or do.

But if you've resorted to defending your argument by trying to find flaws in me, then I'll let you have fun with that. Unless you bring up a valid point, I'm out .

 

[cheezewiz]

wrong and right is different from person to person...

An argument most often made by people trying to justify their own bad behavior.

 

[KeithBMI]

So what should I do if I catch myself breaking the speed limit?

 

[cheezewiz]

Punch yourself in the beanbag.

 

[KeithBMI]

Alrighty.

 

[disenchant]

I would go back and offer to pay for a few reasons:

1. That's what I hope others would do for me if I made the $100 mistake.

2. If you don't have a receipt, then you don't have a warranty if something goes wrong. And karma would make sure something went wrong.

3. Every time I looked at the item I would feel guilty that I didn't take it back and pay for it. I would wonder if I did the right thing. And by that time it would be too late. I don't need that kind of stress in my life.

4. There might be a chance that Home Depot will say "our mistake, thank you for being honest, keep it." At least then I would know I did the right thing.

5. I don't consider it stealing, but I do consider it benefitting from other's mistakes. I do the right thing because I want to do the right thing. It's a personal choice.

 

[Visirale]

I think there is a much higher chance of the employee getting chastized if you bring the thing back and offer to pay for it. If you do nothing, they don't know that the employee messed up and they write it off as "misplaced merchandise" (which they calculate into their expenses... they ASSUME someone is going to steal something). If you bring it back, then the mistake is known and then the cashier can be punished accordingly. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to be punished, but don't try and make it into a case of "helping him out," either.

 

[cheesemonkey]

So If I believe that it's right to beat the living tar out of someone for not returning the unpaid for item, I'm morally correct.

well you obviously aren't that way... but some might be and morally it is correct. Not to bring politics here but "radical Muslims" or "terrorists" (you know the bomber people) think they are doing the right thing though most people would say they are bad people. Do they think they are bad people for doing it? no. I don't know how the whole no political discussions for religion discussion rule goes around so if i need to delete this i will.

 

[cheesemonkey]

An argument most often made by people trying to justify their own bad behavior.

I'm not justifying my "bad" behavior as i don't have any. As I've said I'm not really a believer in bad and good morals... people have different morals and will act differently.

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

well you obviously aren't that way... but some might be and morally it is correct.

Really? So you have no concept of vigilantism? I don't mean in the abstract sense, I mean in the concrete. And when I say "beat the living tar out of", I mean blood, broken bones and hospitalization.

terrorists... think they are doing the right thing though most people would say they are bad people. Do they think they are bad people for doing it? no.

I'm not interested in what "they" think. I'm interested in what you think as that is the only thing germane to this discussion. Do you think it's wrong to commit deadly violence against civilians in order to further a cause?

 

[Eric Perry]

Just last week I bought new sunglasses at Sunglass Hut. $180 Oakleys. I had a leftover gift card sitting in my car from X-mas with "$50" in large print in the upper right corner of the card...

I told the woman, I have this card. I'm not sure if I've used it, or if there's even a balance left on it or whatever. I told her, take off whatever is on the card, if anything, and I'll pay the difference via cash. She goes, rings up my glasses, comes back and hands me a receipt. I ask her how much cash I owe. She tells me nothing, the card covered it all. I very clearly point out it's only a $50 dollar card in the first place. She just shrugs and says I dunno, the card accepted it. I try yet again to explain that it isn't possible. She again tells me the card accepted the transaction. I smile, say thank you, and walk out with free $180 Oakleys.

I tried, not once but THREE times, to explain it wasn't possible. I ain't trying a fourth time.

When I got home, I checked the balance on the card. $11 and change. I bought something with it back in January. There were no Sunglass Hut transactions even mentioned on the card summary.

Oh well.

 

[HooBass]

Wow, this is almost exactly what did happen to me -- an item was overlooked on my cart at checkout at a Home Depot. This particular item was more like $25, though.

In my case I tried to return it, and the guy at the returns counter told me to keep it, that it might have come from a purchase at another hardware store.

So I say *for myself* return it. I think it's good character, but...

...I also say, in cases like this, try not to judge others in the same situation. That doesn't seem to reconcile for most folks, but my philosphy is to try to live my life as I think is idea, but not to push my views on other.

HooBass

 

[cheesemonkey]

Really? So you have no concept of vigilantism? I don't mean in the abstract sense, I mean in the concrete. And when I say "beat the living tar out of", I mean blood, broken bones and hospitalization.



I'm not interested in what "they" think. I'm interested in what you think as that is the only thing germane to this discussion. Do you think it's wrong to commit deadly violence against civilians in order to further a cause?

i see what you did there... i believe that I think its wrong but that other don't...

 

[TrooperFarva]

So If I believe that it's right to beat the living tar out of someone for not returning the unpaid for item, I'm morally correct.

Yes. That's exactly what morals are. I don't understand how this concept consistently escapes you.

But there's not much point in getting into this discussion with you again, I'm sure you'll just give some cop out excuse in an attempt to save face. Again.

 

[KeithBMI]

Just last week I bought new sunglasses at Sunglass Hut. $180 Oakleys. I had a leftover gift card sitting in my car from X-mas with "$50" in large print in the upper right corner of the card...

I told the woman, I have this card. I'm not sure if I've used it, or if there's even a balance left on it or whatever. I told her, take off whatever is on the card, if anything, and I'll pay the difference via cash. She goes, rings up my glasses, comes back and hands me a receipt. I ask her how much cash I owe. She tells me nothing, the card covered it all. I very clearly point out it's only a $50 dollar card in the first place. She just shrugs and says I dunno, the card accepted it. I try yet again to explain that it isn't possible. She again tells me the card accepted the transaction. I smile, say thank you, and walk out with free $180 Oakleys.

I tried, not once but THREE times, to explain it wasn't possible. I ain't trying a fourth time.

When I got home, I checked the balance on the card. $11 and change. I bought something with it back in January. There were no Sunglass Hut transactions even mentioned on the card summary.

Oh well.

Enjoy your stay in hell.

.

.

.

 

[Eric Perry]

Enjoy your stay in hell.

.

.

.

My room was reserved long before the sunglasses, homie!

 

[GregC]

I'd call and see what they say about taking it back. As was mentioned, you might not have to go into the store at all, so the time/driving excuse is shaky.

I'm not a big fan of corporations and what companies go through to turn a profit these days. If the cashier wasn't trained enough so they made the mistake, that's the store's problem. Home Depot is #17on the Fortune 500. They're in no real want for money. Their CEOs probably spend that on coke for their fancy CEO parties.

if it was a small vendor/ single person, yeah, probably. However, I have no qualms with taking 100 bux from a multi-million (if not, billion) dollar corporation.

The answer is simple: Don't give your business to a company you don't like in the first place! I don't shop at Wal-mart for this reason, and generally try to frequent mom-and-pop/local stores when I can. Rationalizing keeping an item later on this way is just lame.

It tells me that the store is financially prepared to absorb a certain amount of loss*snip*

Home Depot takes **** ups and theft into cost of business... it's accounted for... and it doesn't hurt their profit.

This kind of nonsense cracks me up. It reminds me of a scene in Seinfeld, where Kramer tells Jerry to take back an item he broke--when Jerry protests, Kramer says, "They'll just write it off!"

It's a funny line because it's so ridiculous. Guess how the company gets "financially prepared"? They raise prices! Keeping the item isn't going to cost the company anything in the long run, they're going to charge more to everybody that shops there. Basically, that money is coming out of customers' pockets.

Ugh, this thread is a bummer.

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

i see what you did there...

I did not do anything other than point out that moral relativism is a failure as a belief system and in practical application.

i believe that I think its wrong but that other don't...

It goes without saying that others think it's fine to murder unarmed folks, this is why our discussion here is important.

It cannot be both "fine" and "not fine" to blow up a café, discotheque or wedding party to make a political statement or further a political agenda. It must be one or the other.

Do you think it's wrong to commit deadly violence against unarmed civilians in order to further a cause? Or is it wrong?

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

Yes. That's exactly what morals are. I don't understand how this concept consistently escapes you.

It escapes me because the logic in it is inconsistent and I'm not the most logical person. However an "either/or" kind of proposition is fairly easy to deal with.

Some behaviors are either good or bad and, by their very nature (owing to the results attained by that act).

Slavery serves as an excellent example because of its former legal standing. Slavery was wrong in the past, is wrong today and will be wrong in the future.

I ask: What are your views on slavery?

But there's not much point in getting into this discussion with you again, I'm sure you'll just give some cop out excuse in an attempt to save face. Again.

I'm am sorry that you view whatever I said in the previous thread as a "cop out". I was either not clear enough in my statements or I misinterpreted what was written.

I have no "face" to save. And whatever I failed to address in the last thread about this (moral relativism), I'd really enjoy an opportunity to address and exchange ideas about in this one.

 

[XtreO]

I once found two bottles of wine on the bus. I called my sister, whose boyfriend works at "vinmonopolet" (only place in Norway to get wine/liquor) and asked how much they were worth. He said they were worth about 80$ each, but it was probably not a wine I'd like given that I'm a real novice to winedrinking (beer/mead is all I drink).
I thought long and hard, and reached my conclusion; I'll give it to the driver. He spontaneously said he'd give it to the lost and found-office. I instantly regretted it. So if now find an item of value it is impossible to trace I'll keep it, and if I am given too much money back I'll keep that too.