Two Ethical Considerations

[Acim]

So, there are major, world changing ethical considerations and there are minor ones. This thread deals with 2 minor ones. I thought of putting this in "Social World" sub-forum, but wasn't sure and am curious how others would handle these situations? Both of these occurred to me recently.

Please respond to this post (my questions) before reading any other responses from me on this forum.

1 - Late one evening, I pulled into a McDonald's drive-thru, with dual lanes. The restaurant appeared dead/not busy to me. There was a car in one lane, and so I pulled into the other lane. As I rolled down my window, I heard the person in the other car ordering. I then did my order, and the employee told me to pull around and make payment at the 2nd window. There are 2 windows, when busy or during busy times of day, they use both windows. In this situation, they were only using one window.

As I pulled around, I noticed the other car in front of me, stopped at the first window. I thought that's odd, but thought they must have just been in that habit. I waited patiently for a good 30 seconds, then decided to honk and motion them to move forward. They didn't budge. I then waited another 2 minutes, they still didn't budge.

What would you have done after waiting a good 2 to 4 minutes and the car doesn't budge?

2 - I was disc golfing with a good friend who used to golf with me often and now does a few times a year. It was about an hour and half before sunset, which is just enough time for 2 people to get through before dark. The course though was fairly busy, and so we decided to start on holes on the back 9, so as to avoid the crowd on the first hole. Fairly soon we got back to that first hole, and it was still busy. We waited our turn in line, and right when we got to tee, another person I know came up and asked if he could join us. I deferred to my friend (who didn't know this other guy) and he said sure. So, our twosome was now a threesome, playing in a line of holes that were busy with other people, but behind us was a twosome. Generally, after hole 1, if smaller groups come up, you let them play through (which obviously slows you down).

After 3 holes, my friend was not playing well and I thought it partially because he was thrown off by having this other guy playing with us. So, I told the other guy, in a friendly way, if he wanted to just continue ahead of us as a single, that would be fine. He declined and said he was fine playing with us. My friend didn't hear this conversation, and a few moments later said he didn't see himself playing to the end because he thought it would be too dark.

Knowing all this, what might you do in the situation, if anything to resolve things (i.e. with desire to finish as many holes yourself with whoever is willing to play with you to the end)?

I'll respond to this post with what I did, but would strongly prefer anyone that responds to not read my response (2nd post) before offering up what you would've done, or consider the ethical thing to do in the moment.

 

[Acim]

So, here's what I did in each of the situations. I will just note that in one of them I feel I did exactly the right thing and in the other, I had egg on my face.

1 - After waiting what felt like 4 minutes behind the car that wouldn't budge, I decided I would pull around them and just go to the next window myself. I deliberated on that for a good 30 seconds and then decided it really does make most sense to skip ahead of them in line if they are just going to stay stuck at a window where no employee will meet them. I also couldn't think of another solution in the moment than skipping ahead.

When I pulled out to go around them, I immediately saw 2 other cars in front of them. Thus crystal clear to me in that moment why the car in front of me wasn't moving forward. And egg on my face for apparently being so impatient I couldn't just wait the extra 2 minutes that would've had me proceeding along as if it all makes sense and is orderly. Yeah, I felt like an butthead.

2 - When I got to the 4th tee with my friend and the other guy, I insisted aloud that this other guy go ahead of us as a single to speed things up. At first the other guy appeared slightly offended, but then left on what I fully believe was good terms. It struck me as very bold move to push for that, but given that this other guy was now a single player, he was able to move along so fast we never caught up to him again (and likely was able to play through larger groups). Our (twosome) pace picked up, and we never had to let anyone play through, plus finished all the holes just before it got dark.

So, felt like I made the smart decision here, and my friend made it clear to me that it was a bold move, but was the right decision.

So being bold (with minor ethical considerations), you win some and you lose some.

 

[Quintessence]

1) Two to four minutes really isn't a long time. I wouldn't have honked, gotten impatient, or cared. Probably wouldn't even notice.

2) I have never played golf. Not my place to be making any sort of decision as someone who is wholly ignorant of the culture and the rules.

Not sure what "ethical considerations" these scenarios really have.

 

[Acim]

1) Two to four minutes really isn't a long time. I wouldn't have honked, gotten impatient, or cared. Probably wouldn't even notice.

So, if you were somewhere (anywhere in public) and person in front of you was making an error, and you noticed that for 4 minutes, you wouldn't consider it a long time to continue just sitting there patiently? To me, this would be like sitting behind a car at a red light, and the light turns green. You are essentially saying that sitting behind them for 4 minutes wouldn't strike you as a long time when you notice the light is green, and that you wouldn't even notice that it had been 4 minutes. IOW, the light could change over 2 or 3 times, and you'd still sit there, not try to move around them.

2) I have never played golf. Not my place to be making any sort of decision as someone who is wholly ignorant of the culture and the rules.

Not sure what "ethical considerations" these scenarios really have.

The first is do you skip ahead in line when you believe person in front of you is not moving forward due to error you are aware of, and thinking they are currently unable to overcome it? Second one is do you split up the group you are with because you think it will benefit members in a way that is contextually obvious to the situation? I think with the golf one I could bring up situation that you could relate to, but not sure if you care to hear it. Lemme know if you do.

 

[Nous]

I didn't read your second post yet.

Before I answer the questions you ask, may I ask why you are asking these questions concerning "ethical considerations"?

 

[Quintessence]

So, if you were somewhere (anywhere in public) and person in front of you was making an error, and you noticed that for 4 minutes, you wouldn't consider it a long time to continue just sitting there patiently?

I can't and won't generalize like that. The scenario was a line at a fast food drive through, specifically McDonalds. Two to four minutes is pretty normal. As I said, wouldn't get impatient or find it noteworthy in any way.

The first is do you skip ahead in line when you believe person in front of you is not moving forward due to error you are aware of, and thinking they are currently unable to overcome it?

I wouldn't believe what you believed about this situation. I wouldn't have made the assumption "this person in front of me is making an error." Two to four minute wait for fast food is normal and routine. That'd actually be on the fast side compared to some other fast food venues.

Second one is do you split up the group you are with because you think it will benefit members in a way that is contextually obvious to the situation?

I don't know.... put it to a vote?? Situations are what people make of them, so "benefit" is something people ascribe. I prefer to cultivate social circles where folks are able to see the awesome and fun in everything cast their way. Thus, it ends up not mattering what is done in response to this situation, because the folks will be chill about it regardless.

 

[Acim]

I didn't read your second post yet.

Before I answer the questions you ask, may I ask why you are asking these questions concerning "ethical considerations"?

As noted in OP, I see them as minor ethical concerns because they deal with basic social principles that are unwritten rules of conduct, but ones I feel very familiar with. Perhaps better term is "moral dilemmas?" If neither, then not sure how I'd view them, and as noted in OP, perhaps "social" sub-forum might've been place for such inquiry.

Was really just interested in seeing how others may respond in such situations.

 

[Acim]

I can't and won't generalize like that. The scenario was a line at a fast food drive through, specifically McDonalds. Two to four minutes is pretty normal. As I said, wouldn't get impatient or find it noteworthy in any way.

It's not normal in my experience. I found it noteworthy because the car was stopped at the first window. Had the car been stopped in almost any other place, it wouldn't have had me questioning it in the way I was at that moment. And noteworthy because I routinely wait between 15 and (at most) 90 seconds for cars to move forward.

I wouldn't believe what you believed about this situation. I wouldn't have made the assumption "this person in front of me is making an error." Two to four minute wait for fast food is normal and routine. That'd actually be on the fast side compared to some other fast food venues.

So, you're really stuck on the 2 to 4 minutes. I'm telling you that for McDonald's that is slow. If I go to say Taco Bell, I'd call that close to routine. It's also a big gap between 2 and 4 minutes, such that it is a 100% increase on the latter number. I also think you're just neglecting the factors of I observed the restaurant to be dead from moment I pulled in and that they stopped right at the window that was not open.

FWIW, I went to that same McDonald's again today and it was during relatively busy time, and at each moment while I was stopped in line, I honestly believe I was never stopped for more than 90 seconds. That to me, is routine.

Also, am a tad embarrassed to admit how much I go, but am currently thinking my experience vs. really anyone's would probably show up as I go enough to know what is actually routine.

I don't know.... put it to a vote?? Situations are what people make of them, so "benefit" is something people ascribe. I prefer to cultivate social circles where folks are able to see the awesome and fun in everything cast their way. Thus, it ends up not mattering what is done in response to this situation, because the folks will be chill about it regardless.

The only thing I left off of the group splitting one that is a bit relevant to what you're saying now is that I was prepared to play after dark, and thought my friend was okay with that (we'd both play with glow gear, so we'd have no issues with it getting dark). But his updated commentary during the round was changing that dynamic, along with fact we took on an extra member to our group, so splitting up suddenly made sense. I was quite pleased I turned out to be right on that one as that one struck me as more bold than the McDonald's one because it had people I knew personally involved in the situation. I could've alienated a few people had that gone the other way, and people I know personally.

 

[Nous]

As noted in OP, I see them as minor ethical concerns because they deal with basic social principles that are unwritten rules of conduct, but ones I feel very familiar with. Perhaps better term is "moral dilemmas?"

I find it ironic that someone who claims that are no objective moral facts would assume that such acts entail ethical or moral considerations. As I've often said, everyone is ultimately a moral realist.

Anyway, as to your first question, I'm unsure what is the normal procedure at McDonald's drive-thru. I haven't eaten food at or from a fast-food establishment in decades, and I'm unsure what you're referring to as “first window” and “second window” and various lanes. I have tooted my horn at the car in front of me who is not going at a green traffic light. But in such case, I know that that person is supposed to be moving. In the case of the drive-thru, it would seem that the employee would motion or inform a person who is waiting at the wrong window. After all, I was under the impression that completing an order is timed, and workers are rated on their speed--the employee wants the customer to get his food and get out of there as fast as possible. How do you know that an employee didn't tell that customer to wait there?

As to your second question, I'm unsure what needed to be "resolved". What? (Actually, I'm not sure I would consider what you did--inviting the 3rd person to play with you, then telling him to "continue ahead as a single"--very polite.)

 

[Acim]

I find it ironic that someone who claims that are no objective moral facts would assume that such acts entail ethical or moral considerations. As I've often said, everyone is ultimately a moral realist.

Why? Because I note that morality is relative. In both these situations, I see the choice to be made as relative to unwritten social norms, my participating in that both historically and these situations, and that ultimately I did nothing absolutely wrong or absolutely right in either situation. But I do have my take on how both went down, and one I see as me being kinda wrong (with almost no repercussions) and the other I see as me being right that worked out far better than I anticipated about 30 seconds before I made the decision.

Anyway, as to your first question, I'm unsure what is the normal procedure at McDonald's drive-thru. I haven't eaten food at or from a fast-food establishment in decades, and I'm unsure what you're referring to as “first window” and “second window” and various lanes. I have tooted my horn at the car in front of me who is not going at a green traffic light. But in such case, I know that that person is supposed to be moving. In the case of the drive-thru, it would seem that the employee would motion or inform a person who is waiting at the wrong window. After all, I was under the impression that completing an order is timed, and workers are rated on their speed--the employee wants the customer to get his food and get out of there as fast as possible. How do you know that an employee didn't tell that customer to wait there?

Your inquiry doesn't make sense to me. Previously being in that position of first window, I have idea of what an employee could do, but instructing them to stay there would not make sense. Plus it would be visible to me because the windows for that first location do allow one to see in it from various angles. From my position, I had every reason to think the person in front of me is supposed to be moving forward and no indication (until I pulled out of line) to understand why they were stopped at the first window/position.

As to your second question, I'm unsure what needed to be "resolved". What? (Actually, I'm not sure I would consider what you did--inviting the 3rd person to play with you, then telling him to "continue ahead as a single"--very polite.)

The invite to play with us didn't initiate with me, nor was I the person that made that decision, and instead deferred to my friend, which put him on the spot a bit, but was me checking with him before I did allow it to happen. Telling that person later to go ahead as a single was not innately polite and hence the dilemma. I had thought about it (at least twice) to myself before saying it out loud. How to phrase that, but also to make the case of how we would all (3 of us) be slowed down if we continue as is. Given the exchange I had with this person from the moment I said what I said to the moment they left, I really believe it came off to him as very cool, respectable. If you wish, I can elaborate on that exchange.

 

[Acim]

I find it ironic that someone who claims that are no objective moral facts would assume that such acts entail ethical or moral considerations. As I've often said, everyone is ultimately a moral realist.

Anyway, as to your first question, I'm unsure what is the normal procedure at McDonald's drive-thru. I haven't eaten food at or from a fast-food establishment in decades, and I'm unsure what you're referring to as “first window” and “second window” and various lanes. I have tooted my horn at the car in front of me who is not going at a green traffic light. But in such case, I know that that person is supposed to be moving. In the case of the drive-thru, it would seem that the employee would motion or inform a person who is waiting at the wrong window. After all, I was under the impression that completing an order is timed, and workers are rated on their speed--the employee wants the customer to get his food and get out of there as fast as possible. How do you know that an employee didn't tell that customer to wait there?

As to your second question, I'm unsure what needed to be "resolved". What? (Actually, I'm not sure I would consider what you did--inviting the 3rd person to play with you, then telling him to "continue ahead as a single"--very polite.)

Also, requoting the same post as a reminder that OP wasn't meant as me having to explain what I did over and over, but for anyone reading this thread to respond with what they would do, and stick to assertions as only referencing themselves. Feeling the need to put it back on me and have me defend what I did is something I'll not shy away from, but OP is written specifically to ask, no really what would you do in this situation.

I'm sure someone could bring up similar things which historically I have not participated in, but if they explained the situation (as I did in OP), I truly think I could address the inquiry on principle rather than superficial items that may have zero to do with my personal history of being in such a situation.

 

[Nous]

Why? Because I note that morality is relative. In both these situations, I see the choice to be made as relative to unwritten social norms, my participating in that both historically and these situations, and that ultimately I did nothing absolutely wrong or absolutely right in either situation. But I do have my take on how both went down, and one I see as me being kinda wrong (with almost no repercussions) and the other I see as me being right that worked out far better than I anticipated about 30 seconds before I made the decision.

I don't see anything that you did or didn't do as rising to the level of some any objective moral fact. It's your assumptions and language that implies it.

Your inquiry doesn't make sense to me. Previously being in that position of first window, I have idea of what an employee could do, but instructing them to stay there would not make sense. Plus it would be visible to me because the windows for that first location do allow one to see in it from various angles. From my position, I had every reason to think the person in front of me is supposed to be moving forward and no indication (until I pulled out of line) to understand why they were stopped at the first window/position.

Why was this car stopped at that window?

The invite to play with us didn't initiate with me, nor was I the person that made that decision, and instead deferred to my friend, which put him on the spot a bit, but was me checking with him before I did allow it to happen. Telling that person later to go ahead as a single was not innately polite and hence the dilemma. I had thought about it (at least twice) to myself before saying it out loud. How to phrase that, but also to make the case of how we would all (3 of us) be slowed down if we continue as is. Given the exchange I had with this person from the moment I said what I said to the moment they left, I really believe it came off to him as very cool, respectable. If you wish, I can elaborate on that exchange.

I'll take your word for it. I'm glad he was not offended.

 

[Acim]

Why was this car stopped at that window?

As explained earlier, when I pulled out of line, with intent to go around this car, I found out other cars were in front of it. I had waited around 4 minutes which I think of as long time in that situation, and for that restaurant (been there more times than I care to count). Plus I really thought the restaurant was dead/not busy, so all that added together didn't make sense to me to wait that long, but when I pulled out of line to see the car was stopped because of other cars, I realized I was erroneously thinking it was because they stopped at first window and were waiting for employee to service them there.

I still think of this as moral issue, but do realize this is Philosophy part of forum and that generally morality is reserved for larger issues/debates. But morality in general is considered principles of right and wrong. In both situations that came up, and I feel regardless of the superficialities, that others can relate to a) being stuck in a situation, deciding if skipping ahead is right (or wrong) thing to do and b) being in social gathering and asking someone to leave group for benefit of that member and remaining group.