Negative and Positive Duties

Essay 4
Name
Department
Course
Instructor
Due Date
Essay 4
Negative and Positive Duties
People's duty and responsibility are divided into positive and negative, where positive duties entail what one is obliged to do to others. In contrast, negative duty includes what one should not do unto other people. In other words, there are negative responsibilities that compel us to abstain from hurting and injuring others, as well as positive duties that require us to help those in need. Positive responsibilities are essentially ideals; ought to do them, but whether and how one does so is mainly up to each person. We don't usually penalize those who don't perform their duties. The responsibility of charity, for example, demands you to assist people who are in need. No one, however, can be penalized for refusing to help others. Narveson claims that many of us well-nourished and enjoy a pretty good lifestyle have no obligation to help the desperately poor (Narveson, 1993). The only condition is that if we are to blame for someone else's poverty, we owe him assistance and relief. But, putting such circumstances aside, Narveson contends that providing aid to the hungry is ethically voluntary. We may help if we want to, but it is not morally obligated.
The demands of justice, according to Narveson, provide us with all of our moral obligations; besides, there are just two requirements for righteousness. First and foremost, we must make amends for the wrongs we have committed against others. Second, we must respect others' freedom to do as they like. According to Narveson, we are ethically free to do anything we choose as long as we do not infringe on the rights of others (Narveson, 1993). While feeding the poor would be kind and caring, it is ethically discretionary rather than necessary. It is not an issue of justice but compassion. On the other hand, negative responsibilities are synonymous with rights and rules. The right to life, for example, is comparable to a negative responsibility not to murder. Negative responsibilities are harsh norms usually enforced by punishing those who break them. They are built on a guiding philosophy that fosters social integration and fairness.
Hummers Reasonable Principle and Drug Use
The government is a coercive force. In general, when the government passes a law, it also enacts a penalty for those who break it. It is conceivable to establish a law that does not specify a penalty for breaking it, yet almost all laws in the real world have penalties attached to them (Huemer, 2004). If punishing individuals for directly bringing about a result is wrong because it is not part of the government's legal tasks, then punishing people for taking another action because the activity has a probability of indirectly bringing about that outcome is equally wrong. If the state cannot ban me from cutting off my ties with others directly, then the fact that my drug usage may harm those relationships does not give a solid justification to forbid me from taking drugs.
In that respect, drug use should be legalized, and the United States' long-standing policy of outlawing their purchase and distribution is morally reprehensible. He discusses and then attempts to refute what he considers to be the two ...