Tuesday, April 2, 2013
We have talked extensively about morality on the mountain and whether or not it it exists. I think that morals are something that are forged at sea level and are meant to check people's actions while they are in a relatively secure environment. While it is not to say that people are no longer bound to the same ethical codes in dire situations, is it not alright that people make sometimes unpleasant decisions when they are in dire situations? However, I think it is interesting to relate this to the "don't make more victims" idea. If people are knowingly throwing themselves into a situation with great potential for danger, does anybody hold the obligation (moral, financial, or otherwise) to save them? What does it mean when money is involved? We know that Sheldon was not on his A game, so to speak, when he was dropping supplies and assisting the climbers. I wonder how much money it would have cost to make him take more prompt, and helpful action. It is always easy to talk about victims in hindsight and their tragedy, and it is equally easy to point fingers and blame people for the things that they did or did not do in a dire situation. However, we rarely consider what it would have cost potential saviors in the event that they exerted themselves beyond reason to save another's life.