West Coast Publishing
2011 LD—Moral Obligation
“Resolved: Individuals have a moral obligation to assist people in need.”
Hanne Jensen
Whitman College
Summarized Topic Description
Individuals have a moral obligation to assist people in need.
This topic, more than most Lincoln-Douglas resolutions, will depend very much on how the affirmative and negative choose to define the separate words in the resolution. More likely than not, debates on this topic will whittle down to what are individuals rights and responsibilities as human beings and as members of a society. Legally, there is little doubt that most places in the world do not require any action to be taken by individuals for the pure benefit of others, which is why this question falls into the moral spectrum.
Understanding what constitutes morality and a moral obligation is difficult because morality means different things to different people. The various religions and cultures which compromise America, much less the world, show clearly how people’s difference of opinions on the matter of what is right and wrong can show through their laws and customs. In order for a resolution such as this to have any weight as a moral maxim, it should be universal. This poses a dilemma because of the disagreements on the matter.
In addition, the potentially (but not explicitly) limiting term of “individuals” allows for a variety of interpretations. Individuals could mean persons acting solely individually or individuals contributing to a group or organization in order to accomplish assistance on a larger scale. It could be argued that the use of the world individuals in the resolution means the exclusion of government or organizational involvement (that individuals rather than groups have this moral obligation) or merely that individuals must have an involvement in the process, as there is no overt mention of mutual exclusivity.
Determining the need of people can be tricky: in order to establish that a person is in need requires that either the person in question consider themselves to be in need or that a third party observes them and deigns them to have a need. Both possibilities pose a problem for the affirmative and negative as one would mean that only people able to freely accept and express their need would be considered able to accept assistance, and the other would allow for the imposition of alien values and judgments on people who may not want, understand, or even need their assistance.
The very concept of assistance is riddled with its own problems as it does not specify whether or not a person is required to make a substantial difference in the lives of people in need. Assistance could mean a comprehensive and permanent solution to a need or it could mean a small but well-intentioned gesture of good will. Clearly, both the negative and the affirmative debaters have their work cut out for them as far as interpreting and defining the resolution before even debating its merits and shortcomings.
The affirmative debater would be best served by focusing on the natural equality of all people and the ability of almost all individuals to do something to help those in need. Keeping the expansive term assistance down to helping others help themselves or mitigating extremely forceful pressures on the needy as well as interpreting “people” loosely, allowing it to be persons the individuals know or come into contact with daily life would make it difficult for the negative to argue that there are not moral obligations to do small generosities. The affirmative could successfully argue that it is more important for the individual to become involved with the fabric of humankind in a positive way than it is to solve every major world problem.
In contrast, the negative should argue that while it is laudable for individuals to assist others in their community and elsewhere that people have no moral obligations to assist others; the very reason that it is a good thing to do and praiseworthy is because it is going above and beyond what is required. Additionally, the negative has the ability to make many arguments of how individual involvement with be either ineffective or even counterproductive to the overall goal of assisting the needy. The negative would do well to take the side of consequentialism, that all the good intentions in the world won’t necessarily evoke any real change in the landscape of the modern world; it is more important to cause change than it is to have an ethically motivated populace.
Once the angles of the debate are established, it will (as usual) come down to the values. Not getting too bogged down in advantages or disadvantages to practical implementation of either case, truly hammering home the values will be the key to success in a large number of rounds. Make sure they are clearly defined, weighed, and impacted out throughout the entire speech.
Definitions
Individual
Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/individual)
a particular being or thing as distinguished from a class, species, or collection: as (1) : a single human being as contrasted with a social group or institution <a teacher who works with individuals> (2) : a single organism as distinguished from a group
Bing Dictionary (http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+individual&FORM=DTPDIA)
1. specific person: a specific person, distinct from others in a group
"belief in the individual's right to self-expression"
2. any person: a human being, or a person of a specified type
"a panel consisting of four individuals"
"a very unfortunate individual"
3. separate thing: a separate entity or thing
4. [biology] separate organism: an independent organism separate from a group
"The plant part contains the embryo, which gives rise to a new individual."
Although “individuals” is clearly not the most contentious term in the resolution, it is important to decide whether or not to emphasize that individual is separate from a group. If so, the Merriam-Webster definition is probably the best bet, but if the desired goal is to not draw attention to potential mutual exclusivity arguments, it may be preferable to go with Bing’s second definition.
Moral obligation
The Electric Law Library (http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/m142.htm)
A duty which one owes, and which he ought to perform, but which he is not legally bound to fulfil.These obligations are of two kinds 1st. Those founded on a natural right; as, the obligation to be charitable, which can never be enforced by law. 2d. Those which are supported by a good or valuable antecedent consideration; as, where a man owes a debt barred by the act of limitations, this cannot be recovered by law, though it subsists in morality and conscience; but if the debtor promise to pay it, the moral obligation is a sufficient consideration for the promise, and the creditor may maintain an action of assumpsit, to recover the money.
Moral
Bing Dictionary (http://www.bing.com/dictionary/search?q=definition of moral &qpvt=definition+of+moral+&FORM=Z7FD)
1. involving right and wrong: relating to issues of right and wrong and to how individual people should behave
2. derived from personal conscience: based on what somebody's conscience suggests is right or wrong, rather than on what rules or the law says should be done
3. according to common standard of justice: regarded in terms of what is known to be right or just, as opposed to what is officially or outwardly declared to be right or just
"a moral victory."
4. encouraging goodness and decency: giving guidance on how to behave decently and honorably
5. good by accepted standards: good or right, when judged by the standards of the average person or society at large
6. able to tell right from wrong: able to distinguish right from wrong and to make decisions based on that knowledge
7. based on personal conviction: based on an inner conviction, in the absence of physical proof
"moral certainty"
Obligation
Bing Dictionary (http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=definition+of+obligation&form=QB)
1. duty: something that must be done because of legal or moral duty
2. state of being obligated: the state of being under a moral or legal duty to do something
3. gratitude owed: something that somebody owes in return for something given, e.g. assistance or a favor
4. [law] binding legal agreement: a legal agreement by which somebody is bound to do something, especially pay a specified amount of money
5. [law] legal contract: a legal document such as a mortgage or bond that contains the terms of an obligation, usually including a penalty for failing to fulfill it
Included here together are the definitions of “moral obligation,” “moral,” and “obligation.” The first definition of the combined terms is probably the most useful as it considers both terms in relation to each other as opposed to separately. Needless to say, it also will take less time to explain in a round. If, however, the case is constructed so to have significant debate into what constitutes a moral action or what an obligation is, it might be advisable to define each word individually.
Assist
Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assist?show=0&t=1310331776)
transitive verb: to give usually supplementary support or aid to <assisted the boy with his lessons>
intransitive verb: to give support or aid <assisted at the stove> <another surgeon assisted on the operation>
The Free Dictionary (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/assist)
To give help or support to, especially as a subordinate or supplement; aid: The clerk assisted the judge by looking up related precedents. Her breathing was assisted by a respirator.
For arguments requiring that assistance be considered generic help of any size, using the verb in the intransitive form is preferable. For arguments that assistance would be used supplementally, use the verb in the transitive form. Technically, the use of assist in the resolution implies a transitive grammatical structure anyway.
People
Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/people)
1. plural : human beings making up a group or assembly or linked by a common interest
2. plural : human beings, persons —often used in compounds instead of persons <salespeople> —often used attributively <people skills>
3. plural : the members of a family or kinship
4. plural : the mass of a community as distinguished from a special class <disputes between the people and the nobles> —often used by Communists to distinguish Communists from other people
5. plural peoples : a body of persons that are united by a common culture, tradition, or sense of kinship, that typically have common language, institutions, and beliefs, and that often constitute a politically organized group
6. lower animals usually of a specified kind or situation
7. the body of enfranchised citizens of a state
thinkexist.com (http://thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/people/)
1. (n.) One's subjects; fellow citizens; companions; followers.
2. (n.) Persons, generally; an indefinite number of men and women; folks; population, or part of population; as, country people; -- sometimes used as an indefinite subject or verb, like on in French, and man in German; as, people in adversity.
3. (n.) One's ancestors or family; kindred; relations; as, my people were English.
4. (n.) The mass of comunity as distinguished from a special class; the commonalty; the populace; the vulgar; the common crowd; as, nobles and people.
5. (n.) The body of persons who compose a community, tribe, nation, or race; an aggregate of individuals forming a whole; a community; a nation.
There are a surprising number of definitions of the term “people.” Avoid using MW’s definitions #3-6 and thinkexist’s #1, 3-5 unless there is a clear purpose for attributing people to a specific group. The familial definitions can be useful for justifications of special obligation but otherwise, as there is no clear mention of possessives in the resolution, there should be a reason before the definition is employed as such.
Need
Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/need?show=0&t=1310333064)
1. a : a lack of something requisite, desirable, or useful
b : a physiological or psychological requirement for the well-being of an organism
2. a condition requiring supply or relief
3. lack of the means of subsistence : poverty
Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/need)
1. a requirement, necessary duty, or obligation: There is no need for you to go there.
2. a lack of something wanted or deemed necessary: to fulfill the needs of the assignment.
3. urgent want, as of something requisite: He has no need of your charity.
Merriam-Webster’s second definition is probably the most accurate definition in the context of the resolution. If, however, the goal is to argue that a need is something specific, be it food or biological necessities as opposed to an emotional state of contentment, etc, it may be preferable to use one of the other more directed definitions.
Affirmative Case
Here is an example affirmative case which may be used as it is constructed, as a starting point for possible additions, or even just as an example.
Introduction
As the world grows more populous, tight-knit communities become rarer and rarer. It is becoming more of an individually focused world where no one owes anything to anyone but themselves. If everyone were completely self sufficient, this would not be a problem. But in the modern world poverty, hunger, natural disasters, and other compromising circumstances are making the likelihood that all people are living at an acceptable standard shrink away. A world where there can be no trust in other people, no possibility of shared experience in life with other people, is not a hospitable world for anyone. Each person has a duty to help with what then can when they can. Because of this fact, individuals have a moral obligation to assist people in need.
Value
Quality of Life
"Glossary." The World Bank Group. World Bank, 2004. Web. 10 Jul 2011. <http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/beyond/global/glossary.html>.
People's overall well-being. Quality of life is difficult to measure (whether for an individual, group, or nation) because in addition to material well-being (see standard of living) it includes such intangible components as the quality of the environment, national security, personal safety, and political and economic freedoms.
By assisting people in need, their quality of life will be improved because a wrong will be righted, their needs aided. They are not the only ones who will benefit, however: when the overall needs of the community are addressed, everyone benefits and a higher standard of living and quality of life is achieved for all. Without quality of life, life itself is meaningless. Because of this, it is the first thing that should be valued.
Value Criterion
Individual Responsibility
"Wordnet." Princeton Wordnet 3.1. Princeton University, 2011. Web. 10 Jul 2011. <http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=responsibility⊂=Search+WordNet&o2=&o0=1&o8=1&o1=1&o7=&o5=&o9=&o6=&o3=&o4=&h=>.