It has been claimed that an action is morally good only if it benefits

Question

It has been claimed that an action is morally good only if it benefits another person and was performed with that intention; whereas an action that harms another person is morally bad either if such harm was intended or if reasonable forethought would have shown that the action was likely to cause harm.

Which one of the following judgments most closely confirms to the principle cited above?

Which one of the following judgments most closely confirms to the principle cited above?

(A) Pamela wrote a letter attempting to cause trouble between Edward and his friends; this action of Pamela's was morally bad, even though the letter, in fact, had an effect directly opposite from the one intended.

(B) In order to secure a promotion, Jeffery devoted his own time to resolving a backlog of medical benefits claims; Jeffrey's action was morally good since it alone enabled Sara's claim to be processed in time for her to receive much-needed treatment.

(C) Intending to help her elderly neighbor by clearing his walkway after a snowstorm, Teresa inadvertently left ice on his steps; because of this exposed ice, her neighbor had a bad fall, thus showing that morally good actions can have bad consequences.

(D) Marilees, asked by a homeless man for food, gave the man her own sandwich; however, because the man tried to talk while he was eating the sandwich, it caused him to choke, and thus Marilees unintentionally performed a morally bad action.

(E) Jonathan agreed to watch his three-year-old niece while she played but, becoming engrossed in conversion, did not see her run into the street where she was hit by a bicycle; even though he intended no harm, Jonathan's action was morally bad.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

Official Explanation

The argument claims that an action is morally good only if it meets  both  of the following criteria:

(1) It benefits another person.
(2) It is performed with that intent.

The argument also claims that an action that harms another person is morally bad if it meets  either one  of the following criteria:

(1) The harm was intended.
(2) Reasonable forethought would have shown that the action was likely to cause harm.

In choice (E), Jonathan should have realized that if he became engrossed in conversation, he would be neglecting his niece. This satisfies the second criteria for a morally bad action. Reasonable forethought would have shown Jonathan the error of his choice.  The answer is (E).

As to the other choices, (A) is second best. The first part of (A), “ Pamela wrote a letter attempting to cause trouble between Edward and his friend, ” certainly satisfies the first criterion for a morally bad action. But the remainder of the sentence doesn’t seem to relate to the second criterion.

(B) satisfies the first criterion for a morally good action. However, it fails to meet the second criterion because Jeffrey’s action was performed to benefit himself (by helping him secure a promotion), not to help others.

(C) does not meet either criteria for a morally bad action. Teresa left the ice on the steps accidentally. One could argue, however, that a reasonable person would double check her work. Nevertheless, choice (E) satisfies the second criterion for a morally bad action more directly.

(D) satisfies only the second criterion for a morally good action, and it does not satisfy either criteria for a morally bad action.

kapslock · Answer

Morally right when right is done AND intended.
Morally wrong when wrong is done AND intended, OR wrong is done and because reasonable thought wasn't applied.

A is wrong - Pamela wanted to do wrong, but no wrong was done.
B is wrong - Right was not done with intention.
C is wrong - Right was intended, Harm was done, but "inadvertantly" - no judgement if reasonable thought would have averted it.
D is wrong - Wrong done, but no wrong intended, or even carelessness.
E is wrong done because of gross carelessness.

Thought C comes close to an answer, E is more striking. 
Hence, I'f go with E.

sastal · Answer

I have an inkling that the answer is either C or E. I chose E. I just do not like the end of C, that states, "morally good actions can have bad consequences." I thought that the focus of the passage was on actions being either morally good or bad, not on consequences.

jasonbig1977 · Answer

A is wrong because Pamela's action, although with ill intention, did not cause actual harm. 
B is wrong because in order for an action to be morally good, it has to benefit another person, not one's self.
C is wrong because "morally good actions" must benefit another person, so actions with bad consequences can not be "morally good actions"
D is wrong because the Marilees' action is not ill intended, nor she would foresee the choking
E is the correct answer because Jonathan's action ("engrossed in conversation") 1. Caused harm to the kid. 2. It is a careless decision that reasonable forethought would have shown that it is likely to cause harm.

So, E is the answer.

amitahlawat06 · Answer

simple logic: 
action good : only if it is intended to in order to fulfil that cause.
action bad: harm was either intended or if there's a provision in that action that can harm.

Clearly Jonathan's action of being involved in a conversation could lead to carelessness towards his nephew.
so it was morally a bad action \
Answer : E

arya251294 · Answer

E nowhere comes close neither technically nor morally.

The statement simply says that the action will be considered morally bad if any of it were true - 
1.) harm intended
2.) reasonable forethought showed that harm would come

Pamela intended the harm and also her thought process told her that harm would come.

bidskamikaze · Answer

(A) Pamela wrote a letter attempting to cause trouble between Edward and his friends; this action of Pamela's was morally bad, even though the letter, in fact, had an effect directly opposite from the one intended. -  Notice the content in the actual passage: "whereas an action  that harms another person  is morally bad either if..." So we can say that some harm MUST be done if we want to classify the action as bad. In this example, no harm was done..

(B) In order to secure a promotion, Jeffery devoted his own time to resolving a backlog of medical benefits claims; Jeffrey's action was morally good since it alone enabled Sara's claim to be processed in time for her to receive much-needed treatment. -  Jeffery's intention was NOT to solve Sara's problem. Intent AND benefit both must be present for an action to be classified as good.

(C) Intending to help her elderly neighbor by clearing his walkway after a snowstorm, Teresa inadvertently left ice on his steps; because of this exposed ice, her neighbor had a bad fall,  thus showing that morally good actions can have bad consequences . -  The last sentence is something we can't be very sure based on the information in the original passage.

(D) Marilees, asked by a homeless man for food, gave the man her own sandwich; however, because the man tried to talk while he was eating the sandwich, it caused him to choke, and thus Marilees unintentionally performed a morally bad action. -  Neither Marilees intended to cause harm, nor she could foresee the choking.

(E) Jonathan agreed to watch his three-year-old niece while she played but, becoming engrossed in conversion, did not see her run into the street where she was hit by a bicycle; even though he intended no harm, Jonathan's action was morally bad. -  Correct. Jonathan COULD in fact foresee this accident. He was asked to look after his niece for this very purpose : avoiding any accidents while she played.

E is correct.

unraveled · Answer

It has been claimed that an action is morally good only if it benefits another person and was performed with that intention; whereas an action that harms another person is morally bad either if such harm was intended or if reasonable forethought would have shown that the action was likely to cause harm.

Which one of the following judgments most closely confirms to the principle cited above?

Which one of the following judgments most closely confirms to the principle cited above?

Passage deals with morally good action for helping others or with that intention and bad action for harming others or with a forethought for likely harm was given. It, however, doesn't overlaps between the two schools of thoughts. What if good action was intended but instead bad happens or vice-a-versa?

(A) Pamela wrote a letter attempting to cause trouble between Edward and his friends; this action of Pamela's was morally bad, even though the letter, in fact, had an effect directly opposite from the one intended. - WORNG. Exactly what passage says but turns in direction it never covers. We don't know what if opposite happens of the intended action.

(B) In order to secure a promotion, Jeffery devoted his own time to resolving a backlog of medical benefits claims; Jeffrey's action was morally good since it alone enabled Sara's claim to be processed in time for her to receive much-needed treatment. - WRONG. Totally different action, intention and results are considered.

(C) Intending to help her elderly neighbor by clearing his walkway after a snowstorm, Teresa  inadvertently  left ice on his steps; because of this exposed ice, her neighbor had a bad fall, thus showing that morally good actions can have bad  consequences . - WRONG. Red flag is consequences. Even if Teresa forethought, it is difficult to establish the timing(which we are concerned though) of neighbor's fall - the fall could not have foreseen, it can happen with or without forethought. The word inadvertently helps us to solidify our reasoning that this option is wrong.

(D) Marilees, asked by a homeless man for food, gave the man her own sandwich; however, because the man tried to talk while he was eating the sandwich, it caused him to choke, and thus Marilees unintentionally performed a morally bad action. - WRONG. Two actions are there which cause the option to go in direction not covered in the passage. Man's actions is also a contributor for his choke.

(E) Jonathan agreed to watch his three-year-old niece while she played but, becoming engrossed in conversion, did not see her run into the street where she was hit by a bicycle; even though he intended no harm, Jonathan's action was morally bad. - CORRECT. A forethought was missing thus causing harm to the child.

Answer E.

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

It has been claimed that an action is morally good only if it benefits

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

It has been claimed that an action is morally good only if it benefits

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards