Moral Obligation In Eugene Debs My Brother's Keeper

787 Words4 Pages

In Eugene Debs’ “My Brother’s Keeper” he contends that we are “under a moral obligation” to help our fellow man. Deb’s is a prominent socialist during the progressive era; he frequently spoke out for workers rights, being a key member of the Industrial Workers of the World. His claim falters when he fails to account for the survival nature of humans. He ignores Human Nature’s hamartia of trying to understand an issue and place a quantifiable moral obligation to solve it. In a debate that supports Deb’s claim, “Individuals Do Have A Moral Obligation To Assist People In Need”, from Moral Obligations, understanding, a community's morality, and happiness, are the main focus of defence for a moral obligation to be created. The debate, citing …show more content…

reconnecting to the counter argument’s claim that morality extends as far as our ability to comprehend positive outcomes, the simple act of giving the homeless money fails to surpass this issue. Upon seeing a homeless man, people feel morally obligated to give money. When a person gives money, their immediate response is one of reassurance in their good deed. With food banks, a community feels they contributed to helping the homeless. If they took a step back and looked at the end result of their action, it does not extend much past an immediate fruitful happy encounter. This is why moral obligations are non-existent. People do not look at the receiver's happiness, but instead, a quick “happy shot” for their own soul. In reality, giving a homeless man a dollar does not solve homelessness, it rather gives the man a reason to return there again and not pursue a means to escape homelessness. A food drive only allows homeless to be fed for a short time. Instead of looking at the real problem, the inability to sustain the basic human needs of food, water and shelter. If they actually wished to solve homelessness, giving a dollar is an insult. The concept of happiness and understanding being driving factors in moral obligations is flawed because it often confuses gratitude and knowledge for happiness and