• Welcome To ShotTalk.com!

    We are one of the oldest and largest Golf forums on the internet with golfers from around the world sharing tips, photos and planning golf outings.

    Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon!

What would you do?

Pa Jayhawk

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2005
7,101
4
More generally, comparing this situation to robbing someone off the street is ludicrous. But hey, I'm sure you guys are getting a real moralist high off of trashing ezra's decision not to pay $40.
I'll field that part since I was the one to make the comment. I personally do not see a difference for how it related to the conversation and statement for which I quoted. The one is obviously a more heinous crime, although IMO this is not a matter of evaluation the severity of the crime. It is more an issue of ethics and morals. One big problem I see with evaluating the severity of ethics and morals is it is usually done in a manner to justify the offense. To me this is simply compounding the issue. I think you either choose to hold your ethics an morals to a high standard, or you don't. Does this make EZ as bad as someone who knocks of the local blind panhandler? No, certainly not. But by justifying it as not as bad an offense certainly doesn't make it any more ethical or moral.

Kinda like going to church and deciding to take a little back out of the pan. Is that an unspeakable act? Is it still unspeakable if you are an atheist and do not believe the money is going to a good cause? Regardless it is still unethical and immoral in the views of most.

How about the panhandler that is faking blindness and drives a 2007 Corvette as is sometime the case in NYC. Would the act be any more ethical or moral? I guess you need to ask the intent for whom you intended to benefit from the offense. If you answer yourself, I would hold you to no higher moral standard. I guess if you assume all panhandlers are faking it and driving Corvettes you could make a pretty good living by knocking them off and still feel good about what you do.

edit 1 - ... and this isn't climbing up on a high horse. EZ asked the question, I answered it with my honest opinion. Do I think he is despicable for doing so? No. Does it create a question of trust in people that may know him? It certainly may IMO. If you want to try and assign a dollar value, go right ahead. Although that is not something I am willing to do for myself. Personally I think if he felt the need to ask the question, he probably already knew the answer. He likely just wanted the moral compass to stop spinning around, so he stopped to ask directions.
 

Clugnut

Gimme some roombas!
Aug 13, 2006
3,423
1
What I find disturbing is using Corvettes to indicate wealth. Corvettes are driven by people who want to be wealthy, like me.:laugh: Oh, and the small wiener thing....
 
OP
ezra76

ezra76

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2006
12,412
16
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #63
Well I did a good deed today. Although I still can't manage to cough up the $43 I donated some clubs to the 1st tee and will be bringing them a few more and a bag on Thurs.
 

dave.

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2005
5,926
2
PA

You are right,you are entitled to your opinion,and hopefully we won't all fall out over this,its a thread thats generated debate and this is good for the health of the forum.

But its clear we are totally polarised on this.There are some of us who find it bizarre that all sorts of comparisons are being made,robbing church boxes,faking blindness,taking advantgae of incorrectly priced products,doing a runner from restaurants,robbing people off the street etc etc etc.This is fine,its an opinion I/we can respect.It can be described as taking the moral high ground,nothing wrong with that and nothing wrong with calling it that.

But its still doesn't mean we all go along with that.He got a freebie,we all get them every now and then.I took a watch in for repair once and when I picked it up they gave me it back and I left.When I got home I realised I hadn't paid for it.The original reciept said money to pay,the next one said paid.I phoned them up and they said they would call back they didn't.I let it go,their incompetence cost them,and not my morally misguided actions.

Its the law of the jungle.I do not believe in morals in that sense,that does not make me a sociopathic monster,nor does it make me some degenerate out to fleece the poor.Its just how it is,sometimes you get lucky sometimes you don't.I am not religious so this inate belief in separating right from wrong does not mean much to me.On the the hand if I found a wallet on the street never in a million years would I keep it.

As I said,some of us don't think that deeply about it,there are clearly boundaries though and a free round of golf is ok,its within these boundaries.If that makes sense.

Eracer,

Some very good points you make,and you very polite:) But I wasn't questioning whether he was morally right,I was questioning the comparisons.I think simpler than that,you either would and or wouldn't have paid,the comparisons kind of sounded a little like bullying,like we all needed to be told off,and compared to others who conduct far worse deeds.You see it seems some or many of us have a 'sliding' scale of scallyness,and we are comfortable to take advantage at the bottom end of this scale,and there lies the rub.Ez got a freebie that didn't hurt anyone and it wasn't premeditated,it just happened.He got lucky.We are comfortable with that.You and many others aren't.We will never agree,but its not particularly nice to be comared to people who pretend to be blind,run out of restaurants and mug people on the streets.If you categorise us in in the same boat,as one and the same,then thats your right.Your moral compass is clearly totally regimented,its either right or wrong.

But can you see why the tensions are rising? We/they/Ez aren't mugging beggars in the street.He got lucky,thats how we see it.These comparisons,as I say,can be taken as bullying in the sense that 'if you don't agree I will categorise you as X doing Y and that makes you as bad as each other' kinda thing.Hence why we seem to be going around in circles.

Some of us just don't care that much if truth be told,not in this case.Does that mean I will go out and rob a kid of his pocket money or beat an old lady senseless for her purse? Of course it doesn't,and its objectionable to suggest I/we would just because Ez took advantage of an error.

Ez,is clearly feeling guilty because he is now off loading his bad-hoing onto the first tee.I am not so sure thats a good deed considering some of the crap gear he ho'ed;)
 

ualtim

Carrollton, TX
Supporting Member
Aug 20, 2005
7,472
2,154
Country
United States United States
Seeing as I'll never catch Rock's post count I'll go for most replies ever to a thread... what's the record? :)

There was a thread of "This or That" that was quite popular for a while that Farquod started back when TH was fairly new to the board that had a lot of replies. Probably did not generate the amount of words that this one has, but more replies. I will see if I can dig it up and revive it for you. :D

Edit: Here's your link Ez :D <link> This or That <link>
 

Eracer

No more triple bogies!!
Oct 31, 2005
12,405
8
Dave, I appreciate your well-thought words. And I understand that different people view this subject very differently. The comparisons I drew were not to lecture, not to point out a moral superiority, and certainly not to bully. I made the comparisons because I honestly believe that just as there is a wide range of ethical behavior among people, there is also a very clear-cut definition of right and wrong. I believe that anyone with a moral sense (in short, anyone who is not a sociopath) knows the difference. We all justify acts that fall on the side of wrong all too often. We call ourselves lucky that we "got away with it". I'm certainly no different, and would not pretend to say otherwise. If I sound high-handed by expressing my personal belief that it is the moral choices we make that determine our destiny, and if that somehow causes anyone here to feel put upon, then I'm sorry for that. But none of us should ever have to apologize for stating our opinions in a respectful way.

I appreciate that we can have this type of discussion on this forum without degenerating into insults or worse. Calling my thoughts ridiculous bordered on insulting, but I've been on enough forums to know that if I really perceived it that way I would be far too sensitive. It doesn't really bother me to have my ideas called "ridiculous" (lord knows it happens enough outside of this place...:)), and again, I think you and the others in this forum are, for the most part, thoughtful and honest people. Even Ezra.
 

Pa Jayhawk

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2005
7,101
4
Its the law of the jungle.I do not believe in morals in that sense,that does not make me a sociopathic monster,nor does it make me some degenerate out to fleece the poor.Its just how it is,sometimes you get lucky sometimes you don't.I am not religious so this inate belief in separating right from wrong does not mean much to me.On the the hand if I found a wallet on the street never in a million years would I keep it.

As I said,some of us don't think that deeply about it,there are clearly boundaries though and a free round of golf is ok,its within these boundaries.If that makes sense.
Not sure I can really say what I intend any better than what was stated in the prior post by Eracer. I guess it is really just a matter of opinions, for which I have never been afraid to state on this forum. In large part because I understand that for the most part it remains pretty civil and opens up the mind. I can very likely see how to some this may be taken as preachy, but I think it is more because of the nature of the topic and not the content. I likely could not express how I feel on this topic without sounding preachy as that is the nature of the content for the one side of the spectrum when talking about morals and ethics. In the same sense, I would likely not walk up to a preacher after a service and tell him he sounded preachy. The last statement in itself may sound the same, although without knowing my opinion on religion I can see how it may, although that would not be the intent. I do also use alot of analogies in the process, and although they may be ridiculous, they obviously got my opinion across in the manner I intended, that being very quickly. In this case, my opinion that there is a right and wrong when it comes to morals and ethics. While lessor severity may come at a lessor expense, it doesn't mean that the action was right by any means.

I think alot can only be based on the fact of maybe how I can assume people have perceived me in the past. Maybe knowing I am admittedly pretty self centered and self serving based on past conversations like Automobile choice, gas usage, gun control, etc. etc. It may come as no surprise that even though I only may appear on higher ground by stating my opinion, without tossing aside my personal values I do not see how I could come off any different unless it were to simply not respond. In which case this thread would be rather one sided and have no life.

Then again, because of my flaws with my self centered nature, I only made it a point of how many may see the action, including my self. But honestly, based on my experience with EZ this isn't really going make me think much less of him, it is just gives me more information on how I perceive him. I have a lot of really good friends that likely would not have responded any different, although am pretty confident they would never do the same to me. Probably the reason I can move on with the friendships, it really doesn't effect me enough with my self centered nature. But on the flip side, you will not see me take part in the action nor will I feel bad enough for the course that I would go up and make it right with them on the other persons behalf. Even though I consider them a good friend, I would also not likely feel sorry for them if negative recourse comes about from their decision. Kind of like "Live and Learn" philosophy. Make your bed and sleep in it but don't come crying to me if you did something I wouldn't have done and it backfires in any way. In the same sense that I won't go crying to you when the Ozone layer expires in my lifetime after years of abuse from the gas guzzling SUV's I drive finally backfires and it happens in my lifetime. When my entire philosophy has been I will be long gone by that time and I have no kids to consider and I had years of comfort in the process. That is just part of my nature (or many would consider a flaw), that I am well aware of but very honest about in the process. Is that immoral or unethical on my part? I don't see the harm, nor do I see a more conscientious way to enjoy my life in the manner I wish too. So I guess I can only be honest in my opinion on the matter and live with my decision. Now if I were to ask if that were the right decision, I would know what to expect.
 

dave.

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2005
5,926
2
"Calling my thoughts ridiculous bordered on insulting"

Fair point,Eracer,and PA,for my part I apologise for that:) I won't add anything else,I think the discussion has stayed balanced,as they always do in here:)
 

JEFF4i

She lives!
Supporting Member
Jul 3, 2006
13,531
84
This entire scenario is rediculous. Go in and pay after the fact? A day later? Sick stuff if you ask me. Be happy that you are $43 ahead and the next thing you ho costs $43 less. Found money.

It's not your fault. Your boss said he had you hooked up.

After that it is really the course's fault. Shouldn't they pay a starter to check you in as you go off the back side? Shouldn't they pay a ranger to hit you up sometime during the round? If the course gave a shit they would have these safeguards in place. They didn't. Their loss. It's not like you snuck on. You were in a cart on top of it all.

How many rounds a year do you think that course has? 30,000? 40,000? I doubt they are going out of business because only 29,999 paid.

This "go back and pay" talk works in La-La Land and Tutti-Frutti-Ville, but in the real world you just count your blessings. Just feel that you were "comped". The next time you play there, tip your waitress/cartgirl a little better than you normally would.

Should I tell you how I really feel about this? :)

Well, albeit far from me to use some words without discretion, :) But this post is disgusting.

You see, in the world of ethics and morals, it is fair enough to state, that if you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

Let me elaborate. This is not a blessing. This is exploiting a misunderstanding and not correcting your mistake, because it saves you something material, something ultimately useless. The world is not a great place, when it comes to people being fair, decent, and standing on the moral highground. However, you must be.

You see, for this post, I do not think Augster is a good person. Perhaps not a bad person, but this attitude is not conducive to being a good person. There is very rarely a gray area when doing good things. When you want to become a good, moral person, you do it without a gray area. If something is questionable, you do what is right, even if it comes out bad for you in the end. Your loss, perhaps, but you stood for something and at least showed that not everyone is using that bloody statement of gray area to justify their deceit. You can't say, "Well, I'm a good person most of the time, but sometimes I just get caught up in it," or what have you. Being good, means being good without compromising yourself.

If you can't do that, you act in the utmost humility and state to the people, whomever they are, that you wronged, and tell them of your flaws. If you take the lower path, and try to ignore that, then you are damned by that, and your negligence to even try and right your wrong, means you will be forever tainted.

So, what is the relevance of being a good person? It means something. Yeah, there will always be those who see this as a jungle environment, and take what you can get, but if you don't, that's one more person trying to make this world a better place. It doesn't matter if you do, or you don't, make it better, it matters that despite the fact of temptation and your own personal weakness, you still tried. Personally, my family has been to the point of counting pennies to buy beans so we could eat, but they never, ever, compromised themselves. No matter how hard that may have been, they showed that there is some moral highpoint in this world.

So yes, you should pay, if not immediately, save up, even if it's change from food, and try and pay that off eventually. Why? Because it is right. If you do not, no action that you take, will ever erase the taint of compromising yourself.

Oh, and Ezra, you know I like you, but my heart isn't bleeding out about you not affording food mate, priorities. And to be fair, I've my own flaws and plenty of them.
 

dave.

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2005
5,926
2
With the greatest respect Jeff we covered this in the previous few posts.It serves no real purpose to continue to argue about a moral standpoint,there is no right and wrong
 

JEFF4i

She lives!
Supporting Member
Jul 3, 2006
13,531
84
With the greatest respect Jeff we covered this in the previous few posts.It serves no real purpose to continue to argue about a moral standpoint,there is no right and wrong

While I must have missed the memo, my post was an attempt to get Ezra to actually do the right thing.

Once again, my apologies, but until a mod locks this thread(which will probably happen), I'll let them decide, and not you. :)

No love lost, I hope.
 

dave.

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2005
5,926
2
Not at all:)

But we all have a different barometer,thats just the way it is.Most of us live in the grey bit in the middle,murderers and those that wear sacks live in the outer extremes.Augsters view isn't disgusting,he hasn't advocated drowning a sack of puppies because Ez can't afford the dog food.As I say,we all see things differently.I say lets let it lie,but I am not a mod,as you rightly point out:)
 

JEFF4i

She lives!
Supporting Member
Jul 3, 2006
13,531
84
Fair enough. And personally, I advocate drowning puppies...but I think we're on a different page when it comes to, "puppies."
 

Most reactions

Latest posts

Top