Upon first hearing the story of the fateful night of Kitty Genovese and her brutal murder, the room for speculation on the part of the neighbors seems to be slim. Thirty-eight people chose, during this situation, to see or hear what was going on but then did nothing. One could seemingly argue—and very easily—this is immoral and unethical. This assumption is based on a pre-set societal standard. A standard that was made by people who may not have necessarily ever been in such a situation. Objectively speaking, it is possible, highly likely in fact, this was immoral and unethical but, the situations where one could resist an intervention in such a dilemma cannot be ignored. Ayn Rand argues for the virtue of selfishness and this is one example of just why someone would ignore the brutality displayed by Ms. Genovese’s attacker. This argument that even a seemingly selfless act is still acted upon for selfish reasons could go the exact opposite way. Some people said they were afraid and perhaps, this fear is what kept them from acting. Not the fear of moving as I explain later on. No, the fear of being injured or even killed. It may not even be a rational fear but, how many are? Is it rational to be afraid of heights or airplanes? Is it rational to fear choking to death or …show more content…
Consider this—say what you will but, it was not one neighbor or two or even three. Thirty-eight people saw or heard this occurring and no one did anything. If you do assume the position that they are bad people. You must assume that they are all bad people because they didn’t do what you think they should. My question is, how do you know what you would do in such a horrific and cringe-worthy situation? What makes you think you would be different than thirty-eight of your fellow