The Responsibility Project^®. Exploring what it means to do the right thing

31 Comments

What do you think? Leave a comment

• February 15, 2008 by Jeff Whitefield

  Was it a responsible act to watch this man's computer? How does one determine what is responsible and what is not? Here is how I determine the right thing to do: First - is there a moral law dictating the behavior? If there is, I follow it. I do not know of any hard-fast law that says "Though shall watch thy neighbor's computer when they go to the copy store." so.... Second, if no law, is there a principle that I can derive from an existing moral law that applies in this situation. There is a moral directive to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Would I want someone to watch my computer if I was in a similar circumstance? Does this apply to this situation? hmmm... Third, if there is no moral law and it is difficult to find a specific principle derived from a moral law, then I use the context of the situation to determine what to do. What was the context in this situation...was she on a 15 minute break from work with a boss or fellow employees that needed her services? Was she on her own time with no commitments? Only by fully knowing the context of the situation can one determine what is the responible thing to do. I love the video. It sure makes you think, and it points to the fact that there is always a cost for self-sacrifice, and often you do not get any tangible reward. In my life, I have found that whenever I have sacrificed my own wants and desires for others, with no expectation of gaining anything from it, I have always gained...sometimes tangibly, sometimes not.

  Reply

  • February 19, 2008 by Dorothy Gardiner

    I agree with the response "What is Responsible". There are many what if's and such involved. Personally I wouldn't watch anything unless the person was just going to the restroom and I saw them go to it otherwise in thise day and age of weirdos and terrorists, I would hold on to items like a computer or a bag for nothing.

    Reply

  • February 27, 2008 by Paul

    I suppose this comment isn't directly related to Jeff's comments but nonetheless appropriate for the subject. Having watched this man's belongings, in a way, creates two instances of being irresponsible. The man left for longer than he originally stated he would, regardless of whether it was his fault. And by no fault of anyone in particular, a seat was taken up that another customer could have used for the time being. What I probably would have done upon waiting longer than anticipated for the man to return is turn his things in to the counter as "lost". Although, he says he is not responsible for personal belongings, a lost item would almost certainly go behind the counter. I suppose the video creates an interesting discussion concerning responsibility but it does not show a truly "responsible" act. There are too many factors involved!! Well made though!!

    Reply

    • June 2, 2008 by Tamanna

      I think it's very irresponsible on the part of the guy to promise to be back in 15 mins and not show up for over an hour. He could have come back and taken his laptop or at least tried calling the place to say he'll be late and ask her to leave the laptop at the counter with a store employee..

    • April 25, 2010 by demi and joe(jemi)

      thats sorta funny and annoying ``0

    • August 25, 2010 by Merl

      NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS...I always keep my promise. When I know in my own heart that I am akways honest...it's like a badge of honor to me and makes me feel good about myself.

      If anyone does something dishonest to me I just find a way to get even, hand to hand or word of mouth....which, incidently is part of my trade.

      Kung Fu master, BA in psychology, sociology and philosophy and history...................yeah, some think I'm a nerd,,But it's my pleasure.

      Have a good day...............for your own sake

  • April 22, 2010 by Miguel A. Rodriguez-Estrada

    THIS IS A VERY SIMPLE SITUATION AS PRESENTED.

    1) WHY COULDN'T THE OWNER TAKE THE COMPUTER WITH HIM? THIS IS NOT A HEAVY ITEM.

    2) NUMBER (1) FOLLOWS FROM THE FACT THAT NOBODY WOULD SIT IN A PLACE LIKE THAT WITH A HEAVY OBJECT AND I WOULD NOT LEAVE SUCH AN EASY TO CARRY EQUIPMENT IN THE CUSTODY OF ANYBODY.

    3) AND SO, I WOULD NOT LEAVE SUCH AN EQUIPMENT IN A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE ARE COMING AND GOING.

    4) AND LASTLY, WHY NOT APPLY THE AIRPORT PRINCIPLE OF UNATTENDED PACKAGES?

    I BELIEVE THAT IF YOU WANT TO BE A GOOD SAMARITAN, THERE IS ALWAYS A LIMIT.

    WHAT I WOULD HAVE DONE IS LEAVE AFTER MY TIME FINISHED. I DID THE GOOD DEED DURING THE TIME AFFORDED.

    LAST BUT NOT LEAST, NOWADAYS YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFULL WITH WHAT TYPE OF EQUIPMENT YOU WATCH, IF YOU DECIDE TO GO ALL THE WAY.

    Reply

  • May 5, 2010 by Patricia williams

    Sorry 1 I don't watch stranger belong not responseable.

    Reply

  • May 16, 2010 by Sandy

    Would make a great start to a comedy.. :)

    Reply

  • October 23, 2010 by Sarah

    There is a moral law from the first chapter of Genesis. "Am I my brother's keeper?" Actually, yes. We are obliged as humans to care for one another and to be concerned for the welfare for others. It has been the keystone to social interaction for millenia. This phenomena can be observed in the animal kingdom as well. Here is a scenario that happens a lot and most of us would be happy to help the other person. The guy's request did not seem to be much of an imposition as the first lady wasn't going anywhere soon. So she agreed to 15 minutes with the understanding he would honor his end of the bargain and return. He didn't. But she went the extra mile and asked another person if they wouldn't mind, and so on. When he knew he was being held up at the copy shop even after 20 minutes, he should have returned to the coffee shop and released the first lady from her obligation. The fact that he remained away more than 2 hours showed a real lack of consideration for the lady's good nature and their little contract became an imposition. A laptop is still a valuable piece of property. She could have just walked away, or walked away with it. She didn't.

    Reply

• February 26, 2008 by Bob Kirton

  I have no problem watching something for someone. It is human nature, we all like to help when we can. There are limits, in this case 15 minutes is fair. If I agreed to watch the laptop and it was time for me to leave I would go to the establishment manager and tell them what happened and then leave. It then becomes the obligation of the establishement, regardless of what the employee would like you to think.

  Reply

• February 27, 2008 by Geoff Blair

  I was completely unmoved by this movie. It was unrealistic to expect someone to watch a valuable object for a long period of time. The expected consequence of this action is always loss of the item because people are inherently bad. The movie fails to even pose a moral problem because the most common action, and in fact response, would be to call it quits after 15 minutes and turn the items into the manager. Thus the movie only seems to prove that there is a time limit to the good graces of strangers to which I say…..duh!

  Reply

• February 28, 2008 by Steven Westerdahl

  I've read with interest the comments about this movie. One question that I think deserves further discussion is how far does our moral obligation to be responsible extend to those who are acting irresponsibly? It is irresponsible in my judgment to ask a stranger to watch a valuable personal item for any more than a couple of moments e.g. the time it takes to go to the rest room or retrieve a sugar packet at the counter. Certainly, it's irresponsible to physically leave the premises and not return when promised. In the film, I think it was responsible for the initial "table guardian" to have agreed to watch the man's computer. My feeling is that the bounds of her responsibility could reasonably have been reached when the man failed to return within 15-30 minutes or so from when he said he would. After that, she could have walked away and the man would then suffer the potential consequences of his irresponsible behavior e.g. a stolen laptop. I think the determination of the "responsibility boundary" in the face of irresponsible behavior is largely contextual. Many variables need to be considered, including will innocent parties be harmed if I leave my post. For instance, if a neighbor mom says, "Can you watch my kids for a hour?" and doesn't return until the next day, the responsibility boundary would extend to the return of the mother.

  Reply

• April 20, 2008 by Jan Newman MD

  In general I watch people's belongings for them in restaurants, airports, etc. I have asked people to watch my things. Sometimes they were watched and other times not even though the person agreed to watch them, and I was gone only momentarily. In all but one instance, the belongings were there when I came back even if the person wasn't. In that instance I asked someone to hold my monopod while I was taking some photographs. I came back a couple of minutes later, no person, no monopod. It was no where to be found, not even in the lost and found. This was a 40 year old woman who must have taken it home....Go figure. So I guess it comes down to trust and good karma and whether you are willing to lose that which you have entrusted to others. if you are not, don't leave it. Do we have a responsibility? Yes. Is it the best thing for us and others to fulfill that responsibility? Yes. Can we be assured that others feel the same way even if they appear reliable? No. Leaving one's computer for over 2 hours is over the top. he must have had good karma.

  Reply

  • April 10, 2010 by Monica Gordon

    It's funny you should mention watching things for people in airports. The first thing I thought of was "that wouldn't happened in an airport." Everytime I've been to an airport -- which hasn't been much since 9/11 (and not b/c of the safety issue -- the "random" searching is quite violating) -- I've been asked if I was given anything to carry by someone or asked to watch things. It occurs to me, in this day and age, that it could be dangerous and thereby even irresponsible to agree to watch a stranger's stuff while he/she/it is away. I don't want to seem paranoid, but it is a different world we live in. While we may not have many suicide bombers here in the States, we do have people who would leave bombs and walk away.

    Reply

• June 10, 2008 by Alvin Rodriguez

  ...but not on my part! Some think "people are inherently evil" and another "people generally want to do good". What about me? I would like to be helpful but not to a terrorist! Would I ask someone to do something like this for me, in good faith? I doubt it! Unless I knew that person. Why? The trust factor! If someone asked to watch something valuable like that I would be suspicious because I don't find it likely when there's no acquaintance. No chance. I might be abetting a fool -- or a terrorist. That's not being responsible, friendly or in any way wise.

  Reply

• August 2, 2008 by Elizabeth Wilson

  Many people assume that it is always someone who will take the lead of responsibility leaving them off of having to think about being responsible. When someone asks people to give, someone or some persons are always relying on the "someone else" who will do it. Someone never taught this guy about what it means to be responsible, therefore he would exhibit a character flaw that would make him insensitive to another's need to hold dear what it means to be truly responsible. One, the first woman could have promised she would meet someone at a certain time. She evidently, extended her stay as long as she could, because she accepted the responsibility of the promise she made to this guy. Soon the responsibility went from one person to five people. And soon as this guy returns as if there was "no harm no foul", he doesn't even show genuine remorse for his actions. Just acts as if its no problem. Well it is evident this kind of person would not make a good pal because he would always be concerned about his balance of goods on the scale of friendship. He would never regard the imbalance because of his greed. He would just assume it is the responsibility of another. This guy is a real jerk.

  Reply

• April 6, 2009 by Sreeram Iyer

  Interesting stuff here....when all things are normal in a civilized society where people are able to think of others as normal people and not constantly worried ..then it is possible for something like this to happen ...and indeed many of us have done precisely this at some point in our lives...asking for help from strangers and trusting them to look after our precious things... However, in the modern "terrorist" age ...it has become necessary to be increasingly cautious in doing this for bigger or more anonymous bundles - as these could be bombs or other destructive devices ..left behind for triggering later when the "perpetrator" is a safe distance or time away...so many public places, transport agencies and airports etc...have warning about this kind of anonymous leaving behind of things and warn against taking responsibility for such things and leaving them unattended...So if you have been from an area which has been targeted in such a way ...you would want to think twice and recommend to the person that he lug all his stuff away ...as in any case the space is not his to keep for ever ..only when he is eating or drinking there...not as a temporary space hired for the price of a coffee et al.. :-) ...Just a thought...very different ..from a different time place and awareness ... :-( ..

  Reply

• June 7, 2009 by Cecil Voorhees

  This short film is top of the line. It should be on TV for real or it should be made as a hidden camera true life story (security included just in case). I loved it. The last lady hit the nail on the head way to go for an end.

  Reply

• December 27, 2009 by Washington Worthington

  thanks for this Lieber Spoon of Civility which makes Mutual Ties and Bonds amongst Folks.

  Reply

• May 5, 2010 by Brother Barn

  We can point out the obvious and say, "Why didn't he just take his laptop with him", but such a focus would be on the wrong character in this situation. What we are presented with is someone behaving in a irresponsible manner, and completely entrusting (thereby passing the focus onto) those others that could very well just refuse the responsibility, actually be trusted to watch his personal property, or flat-out steal (or let be stolen) the laptop.

  It's an interesting situation, however it is very dependant on trusting absolute strangers throughout to give impact on the final message. So, when we are shown how many people are inconvenienced by this initial person, and brought back around to the end where his own intentions are brought into question, we're either left to think that perhaps the message here is that we should avoid putting others in situations that are our responsibility, or we should not take advantage of the kindness of strangers.

  The reality of the situation is that the man did something very idiotic (to put it mildly), but was also extended throughout as growing more irresponsible as time went on. The fact of the matter is, with the very real option of bringing the attention of the situation to the manager of the coffee shop, and having him be the person to take the laptop into his care would've easily freed anyone else from the duty (and thus freeing up an otherwise unoccupied table) should have been the correct action if the encounter with the very first person to have this passed onto her was unavoidable.

  Reply

• May 16, 2010 by May

  The guy was the irresponsible one. I think that if he's that inconsiderate, he has forfeited all rights to have anyone respect his stuff. Sorry, but it's true. He couldn't have left the copy place to say it was taking longer than expected? I would have taken it to the counter and said, "Look, someone left their laptop here. Could you keep it at the front in case he comes back for it?"

  Reply

  • October 10, 2011 by dee

    I do not think that it is responsible for people to leave their valuables in a public coffee shop. For one, you ask someone to watch your things for over ten minutes and that leads to you preventing another commercial customer from using a table in the coffee shop particularly when the business is somewhat crowded to begin with. Also, if the person who leaves items fails to return in the time they promise to return and you have promised to keep an eye out for their items, you may like the lady in this film fall victim to having your personal time abrogated as the result of another person's lack of planning.

    I think businesses should have a check area for baggage if customers are in the habit of leaving things on the business premise. It is not a good idea to think that other people have to extend a courtesy of watching your personal items. Also, what if the property you are asked to watch has been stolen or as in this film the responsibility for guarding the property has been delegated to another customer who has no picture of who the real owner is.

    Reply

Tell us what you think.