Should the worth of a moral action be judged by the Cost suffered from the moral actor, or the Benefit conferred upon the recipient?
Is it as good a deed for a millionaire to give $1,000 to the needy, or someone of low SES to give $50 to the same cause?
If you aren't sure, is it because you think that moral actions shouldn't be compared, or because a fair assessment should factor both the costs and the benefits? And if the latter, which one, if either, should be more heavily weighted?
Is it as good a deed for a millionaire to give $1,000 to the needy, or someone of low SES to give $50 to the same cause?
If you aren't sure, is it because you think that moral actions shouldn't be compared, or because a fair assessment should factor both the costs and the benefits? And if the latter, which one, if either, should be more heavily weighted?