英语阅读：Warped view of right and wrong
There are often media reports of events in which issues of ethics areinvolved. These reports often trigger debates among media critics and Internet
surfers. In the debates, "human nature" and "human right" are frequently
mentioned. In many cases, however, these two concepts are abused.
A few days ago, a teacher posted an article at the www.tianya.cn website
telling of his experience in the earthquake that struck Sichuan on May 12. He
was giving a lecture in a classroom on an upper floor of a middle school in
Dujiangyan when the building trembled. He dashed out of the classroom and
hurried downstairs to the playground to find that he was the first to have
escaped to safety.
Later, answering a student who accused him of leaving his pupils behind in
danger, he said: "I am one who pursues freedom and fairness rather than one who
will sacrifice his life to save others. Faced with the choice between life and
death, I would possibly consider to sacrifice my life only if it were to save my
daughter; I wouldn't care about anybody else even if she was my mother." He then
said: "This may sound like finding excuses for myself, but I haven't the
slightest sense of guilt."
His frank confession triggered strong responses from the netizens. While
most voiced their indignation at the man's "betrayal of teachers' professional
ethics", many expressed sympathy for his "involuntary act of human nature" and
argued for his "human right" to protect himself. They said the man should not be
blamed.
I agree that the man is not legally culpable but I do not think he is
completely unblamable.
Admittedly, anyone has the right to stay away from danger when his/her life
is threatened. But the man's situation was not simply one where life confronts
nature. He was a teacher and his students were in great danger when he ran away
alone. Though he was not legally bound to the obligation, protecting students
from danger should have been his instinctive reaction when danger struck.
In the May 12 earthquake, scores of teachers died protecting their students
from falling buildings. When excavated from the debris, they were all found in
the same posture - spreading their arms to shield the children under their
bodies. I believe they did so out of a teacher's instinct. They could not have
given a thought to anything else in a split second, be it a legal right or an
ethical virtue.
Maybe we who did not experience the quake are not eligible to blame the
escaped teacher but his act was certainly a deplorable contrast to his
colleagues' heroic acts.
More contemptible is his flaunting of his contempt of a man's bravery of
protecting the weak - children and elderly - and his unconditional pursuit of
"personal freedom". In the 6,100-word article he posted online, a fairly large
part was devoted to the defense of this personal freedom.
Those who cited "human nature" and "human right" to defend the man are also
deplorable. Perhaps they meant to show how they were impartial and cool-minded
amid the nation's passionate support of the heroic deeds of the locals of the
quake-stricken areas and the rescuers from across the country. But they were
actually confusing right and wrong over the issue of ethics. Most representative
of these people was the one who cited the Law on Teachers, which does not rule
that a teacher is responsible to protect students in case of natural disasters.
"Therefore," the defender said, "the teacher is not blamable."
This is a ridiculous logic, for being legally inculpable does not mean
ethically righteous. Those who try to show they are more "civilized" by mocking
the public's common sense of righteousness are actually ridiculing
themselves.
E-mail: liushinan@chinadaily.com.cn
页:
[1]