PT3.S4.Q24 -It has been claimed that an action is morally good

Iheartmycat

Having a hard time understanding why A is wrong. The action was intended to cause harm thus necessitating it to be morally bad….right?

I know I’m wrong. I just need to know why.

help

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

mattscrappy

The map out of the conditionality is "If harm was intended or forethought could have prevented harm, then an action is morally bad." BUT, we only know that this applies if there actually is harm. We don't know if an action intended to harm but doesn't is also morally bad. AC A specifies that the intended harm hard the opposite effect, and so, since no harm occurred, we can't prove that it was morally bad and therefore AC A must be wrong. It's very compelling, but it doesn't trigger the conditionality of the principle listed. Hope this helps.

Ashley2018-1

I personally wouldn't diagram this out and would just keep the two conditional statements in mind and go through the answer choices one by one. But oh geez louise, A is attractive lol. But the problem is is that the action, aka Pamela writing that letter attempting to sabotage Edward and his friend...backfired and produced good results for the two of them and so the second conditional doesn't apply.