LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica

Is doing nothing considered immoral if you have no negative or positive impact on a situation?

3 years ago by Raycu with 3 comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • Qukatt

    depends on the context of the situation.

  • kdawson

    Inaction is a virtue in Taoist thought. I have often thought how much better it would be if people just minded their own business.

  • Fuyu

    If it is a situation where you are certain you could positively impact it without negatively impacting yourself and others, then I wouldn't say it's immoral to not do anything, but I would say it's moral to do something. The two don't necessarily need to be present in every situation together.

    However, trying to impact a situation without certainty of the results is reckless to the point it could be considered immoral, as your carelessness could cause more negativity than had you not interviewed.

    In short, it is not immoral to not act, but it could very well be immoral to act.