I bought something, store made an error, ethical decision

[HolySouls]

Hey Rosie... was this a test or a question?

Yes. It is true but I posted it because of the disturbing answers on the other ethical retail question. People should not try to wiggle so much. This was a simple thing. Would I have gotten different responses  had I accidently been given too much from an individual or smaller store? Right is right.

So in other words, you asked it so that you could then tell us how much more morally superior you are.

[piabee]

Yesterday I got a 10-dollar bill and a 1-dollar bill in change when it was supposed to be a 5 and a 1. I didn't notice until after we had left. Should I have taken it back?

Buy one of the products at the store for $5 then put it back on the shelf.

It's a movie theater an hour away.

[piabee]

This thread was made for general consideration so all may be more aware of potential decisions which may need to be made.

Had I been not mindful of the ethical aspect, it was have been very easy to do what was wrong. Everything was pushing me to do what was wrong, even though doing what was right took no more effort. Why would one be pushed to do something which was not easier than another, yet, was immoral?

No one said that you should keep it outright.

[WhollyRoaminCatholic]

Yesterday I got a 10-dollar bill and a 1-dollar bill in change when it was supposed to be a 5 and a 1. I didn't notice until after we had left. Should I have taken it back?

Buy one of the products at the store for $5 then put it back on the shelf.

Having worked for big retail, this doesn't fix anything. It just creates a different problem.

[Rosarium]

Hey Rosie... was this a test or a question?

Yes. It is true but I posted it because of the disturbing answers on the other ethical retail question. People should not try to wiggle so much. This was a simple thing. Would I have gotten different responses  had I accidently been given too much from an individual or smaller store? Right is right.

So in other words, you asked it so that you could then tell us how much more morally superior you are.

No, you can't say "So in other words..." and claim whatever meaning you wanted.

So, in MY words:

This thread was made for general consideration so all may be more aware of potential decisions which may need to be made.

Had I been not mindful of the ethical aspect, it was have been very easy to do what was wrong. Everything was pushing me to do what was wrong, even though doing what was right took no more effort. Why would one be pushed to do something which was not easier than another, yet, was immoral?

The issue was not how I acted, but how one (the reader) would act. It was not a test, at least, a test in the usual sense. It was a way for people to theoretically address a decision which is important.

It has nothing to do with me or my choice. It was a simple thing which took no extra effort.

And why did you consider that conclusion? Why would you want to think such a thing? Can we not discuss ethics without people making accusations like that?

[Rosarium]

Yesterday I got a 10-dollar bill and a 1-dollar bill in change when it was supposed to be a 5 and a 1. I didn't notice until after we had left. Should I have taken it back?

Buy one of the products at the store for $5 then put it back on the shelf.

Having worked for big retail, this doesn't fix anything. It just creates a different problem.

Like I wrote earlier:

It is not a matter of a balanced human system or of being recognised for it, but of being just. In even the small picture, it is likely a small matter, but it will show how we make choices.

We are not supposed to agonize over little things which we can do little about, but sometimes, the situation is more straightforward to resolve.

[Rosarium]

This thread was made for general consideration so all may be more aware of potential decisions which may need to be made.

Had I been not mindful of the ethical aspect, it was have been very easy to do what was wrong. Everything was pushing me to do what was wrong, even though doing what was right took no more effort. Why would one be pushed to do something which was not easier than another, yet, was immoral?

No one said that you should keep it outright.

I did not say anyone did.

Like I wrote, it is for general consideration.

[HolySouls]

Hey Rosie... was this a test or a question?

Yes. It is true but I posted it because of the disturbing answers on the other ethical retail question. People should not try to wiggle so much. This was a simple thing. Would I have gotten different responses  had I accidently been given too much from an individual or smaller store? Right is right.

So in other words, you asked it so that you could then tell us how much more morally superior you are.

No, you can't say "So in other words..." and claim whatever meaning you wanted.

So, in MY words:

This thread was made for general consideration so all may be more aware of potential decisions which may need to be made.

Had I been not mindful of the ethical aspect, it was have been very easy to do what was wrong. Everything was pushing me to do what was wrong, even though doing what was right took no more effort. Why would one be pushed to do something which was not easier than another, yet, was immoral?

The issue was not how I acted, but how one (the reader) would act. It was not a test, at least, a test in the usual sense. It was a way for people to theoretically address a decision which is important.

It has nothing to do with me or my choice. It was a simple thing which took no extra effort.

And why did you consider that conclusion? Why would you want to think such a thing? Can we not discuss ethics without people making accusations like that?

I'm only drawing a conclusion based on what you said, your latest obfuscation notwithstanding.  I stand by my conclusion, although I do expect you to continue to deny your intent.  It's part of keeping your air of moral superiority.

[Rosarium]

I'm only drawing a conclusion based on what you said, your latest obfuscation notwithstanding.  I stand by my conclusion, although I do expect you to continue to deny your intent.  It's part of keeping your air of moral superiority.

I am sorry I gave that impression, and it was certainly not my intent.

When discussing what is revealed to us through the Church about proper behaviour, it can seem one is being judgemental or personal about it, but I am not.

As for moral superiority, I follow to the extent I am able the highest source of morality, God's Will as revealed by the Church. This does not mean I am satisfactorily able to do what I profess, but I can still profess it. It is not about me, but God.

[HolySouls]

I'm only drawing a conclusion based on what you said, your latest obfuscation notwithstanding.  I stand by my conclusion, although I do expect you to continue to deny your intent.  It's part of keeping your air of moral superiority.

I am sorry I gave that impression, and it was certainly not my intent.

When discussing what is revealed to us through the Church about proper behaviour, it can seem one is being judgemental or personal about it, but I am not.

As for moral superiority, I follow to the extent I am able the highest source of morality, God's Will as revealed by the Church. This does not mean I am satisfactorily able to do what I profess, but I can still profess it. It is not about me, but God.

That's better.