Moral relativism or a case of scruples?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sheeniac
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sheeniac

Guest
All,

At a team dinner for work, someone mentioned that her husband had purchased luggage for her and it went on sale a week later. He returned with the receipt, brought a suitcase up from the display, and customer service gave him the difference. However, they took off the tags and handed him the bag.

The husband didn’t realize it until he got home but then didn’t return to the store to give it back.

I was the only one who felt it was wrong, and that he should return it. Everyone else said ‘mistake made by store, oh well’. I was stunned - no one even admitted to feeling conflicted about it and barely needed to think about it.

The youngest person there was in their 30s, and we’re all well compensated professionals.

Would you consider this to be a failure (or perhaps a feature) of moral relativism? Everyone was surprised to hear my opinion.
 
Tis no scruple.

They need to return the bag unless they call the store and the store says “keep it”.
 
Did he not bring the original suitcase with him when he returned it to get the sale price? I’m confused…
 
The husband didn’t realize it until he got home but then didn’t return to the store to give it back

so the husband went in there with just the receipt and then left with a new bag and didn’t realize it, HOw could that be?

so they have two bags at home now, yes that is wrong then.
 
Of course he realised what he was doing.He might have been “conflicted” or “confused” but he wasn’t unconscious!
 
I had to read your post several times before I understood that he hadn’t brought the original suitcase back to the store and that they gave him a second suitcase, correct?

But, yes, this is considered stealing. Once he realized what had happened, he was obligated to return the other suitcase.
 
Sheeniac said:
All,

At a team dinner for work, someone mentioned that her husband had purchased luggage for her and it went on sale a week later. He returned with the receipt, brought a suitcase up from the display, and customer service gave him the difference. However, they took off the tags and handed him the bag.

The husband didn’t realize it until he got home but then didn’t return to the store to give it back.

I was the only one who felt it was wrong, and that he should return it. Everyone else said ‘mistake made by store, oh well’. I was stunned - no one even admitted to feeling conflicted about it and barely needed to think about it.

The youngest person there was in their 30s, and we’re all well compensated professionals.

Would you consider this to be a failure (or perhaps a feature) of moral relativism? Everyone was surprised to hear my opinion.
Click to expand...
No doubt, he should have returned the extra bag he was given by mistake. In fact, if he appeared with the receipt only to get the refund, he had to know he was being given a bag he did not have. He should not have even gotten home. How did he not realize it at the register when she was bagging the sale priced bag?
 
Leegal said:
No doubt, he should have returned the extra bag he was given by mistake. In fact, if he appeared with the receipt only to get the refund, he had to know he was being given a bag he did not have. He should not have even gotten home. How did he not realize it at the register when she was bagging the sale priced bag?
Click to expand...
Since this is a classic theft scheme that’s been going on for years, I find it nearly impossible to believe that he didn’t know. Furthermore, why did he need the sale priced bag in the first place? the store’s computers would track that information from the receipt information, which only makes me think that he was purposeful in his actions.

but regardless, it’s not being scrupulous, it’s actual theft.
 
Sheeniac said:
All,

At a team dinner for work, someone mentioned that her husband had purchased luggage for her and it went on sale a week later. He returned with the receipt, brought a suitcase up from the display, and customer service gave him the difference. However, they took off the tags and handed him the bag.

The husband didn’t realize it until he got home but then didn’t return to the store to give it back.

.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry I must be reading it wrong. Most stores have a policy that they will honor a sale price if you take back recently purchased merchandize. I don’t get the chronology of the husband’s act. He brought back the suitcase, returned it for the price he paid, and went and bought another at the sale price. What am I missing?

If he did not return the original bag, how do you walk out of the store with a suitcase and not realize it? Yes if he took another bag, and now has two, it is outright theft.
 
puzzleannie said:
I’m sorry I must be reading it wrong. Most stores have a policy that they will honor a sale price if you take back recently purchased merchandize. I don’t get the chronology of the husband’s act. He brought back the suitcase, returned it for the price he paid, and went and bought another at the sale price. What am I missing?

If he did not return the original bag, how do you walk out of the store with a suitcase and not realize it? Yes if he took another bag, and now has two, it is outright theft.
Click to expand...
He did not bring the first suitcase with him. He only brought the receipt to show the original price. Then he picked up one of the ones on sale to show her the new sale price. She gave him the difference AND bagged up the store’s suitcase that was on sale.

Yes, how did he now realize he had a suitcase that he did not come in with?
 
Well, I can certainly see him being a little bit of a flake. His conscience was bothering him and he called her to tell her about it. (We’re consultants and are on the road 100% of the time.)

I’m glad to read the replies here, since I had started to wonder whether I was ‘off’’ in my thinking. The whole conversation was an eye-opener to say the least. It really must be moral relativism that gives people the room to perform mental gymnastics in order to justify what they want to do.

Thanks for all the comments!
 
1ke said:
The word you are looking for is Theft.
Click to expand...
Sad thing is that the OP is the only one who thought it wrong.

Perhaps they didn’t want to “offend” by suggesting it was wrong, which, in such a situation, is a ridiculous cop-out.
 
If the person in question was indeed merely a “flake” then this would not be a sin of theft. Maybe a sin of omission (omitting diligence). If it were deliberate, then it is a theft.
 
Ok - but shouldn’t that be contingent upon returning it? I can believe that he did take it without thinking, but it seems to me that making that decision not to correct it is indeed a problem.
 
runningdude said:
If the person in question was indeed merely a “flake” then this would not be a sin of theft. Maybe a sin of omission (omitting diligence). If it were deliberate, then it is a theft.
Click to expand...
If he were a “flake”, then taking it initially is not theft, but not returning it once he realizes it, that’s where theft comes in. He is aware of it now and has chosen to keep it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top