For my portfolio I chose to use my research paper: “Are Atomic Elements and Radioactive Materials Beneficial or Detrimental to Mankind?” and two of my core writings from last semester: “Where are The Lines of Privacy and Freedom of Knowledge Drawn?” & “Is Google really Making Us Stupid?” The three papers discuss whether the topics are actually good for us?- radioactive elements, the openness of the internet, or the ease of finding information on the internet. In the end each paper has it’s conclusion that is deduced from a long process of research, that should seem a rational answer to the question being asked.
To begin, both of these cases show wrongful conduct. However, it may not be one’s duty to always aid and assist others in need, it does involve a certain level of moral conduct. Something you do simply because it is the human thing to do, or the do-gooder’s action. With this said, in both situations there seemingly would be a “penalty” for your actions if you choose to help. This is where the morality of your conduct would come into play. Either action of helping the birdwatcher or sending money to charity would put a dent in your wallet; whether it be a few thousand dollars for a leg or a hundred for ten lives. By choosing not to help you have greedily and selfishly put your own interests at heart. As you are living comfortably, obviously you have money to spare. Why not set aside for those less fortunate? In both situation the actions taken exemplify equally wrongful conduct because the lack of value over human life, or another’s well being- in exchange for something more convenient to for yourself.