| I agree with everyone on #1. The addict killed himself, whether it was due to weakness, recklessness or a death wish, he killed himself. I don't see where question one actually has any connection with compassion in any way.
#2 is too vague and general a question to answer. It could be the first man in that he may have assumed the addict would spend the money on dope and decided withholding the money would indirectly benefit him. Or it could be the man didn't care at all about the addict.
The second man is a hard call too, as he may well have been compassionate in giving the addict money in the hopes he would use it to eat, as if he knew it would be used on dope he couldn't be seen as compassionate at all. The very act of giving money isn't necessary a compassionate act in itself. He could have deliberately given the addict enough money to allow the addict to go off and kill himself or if he was a wealthy man he could have given the addict a few dollars which meant nothing to him just to get the addict out of his face. Or it could be the man didn't care at all about the addict.
Compassion is more than an act, it is the intent behind the act as well. |