Negative Duties, Positive Duties, and Rights

Tempted to join in or not? Moral temptation and self‐reported behaviour in bullying situations

“…If both can be shown as not contingent on one’s own role in the context of a moral or morally relevant situation, then one can decide to yield to the temptation. In the passive moral temptation situation, the moral norm involved refers to a positive duty which by nature carries a weaker moral obligation than a negative duty (Belliotti, 1981). Against this background, we may ask ourselves whether this does not also hold for bullying from the perspective of a bystander: As the bullying is neither intended nor initiated, the question might not be as much whether to bully or not, but rather whether to help the victim or not.…”

“…A third feature refers to the strength of the moral norm inherent in the situation, that is, whether a negative or a positive duty is involved (e.g., Belliotti, 1981). Getting too much change money, the situation used in our study, differs considerably from proactively stealing money from someone.…”

“…At best, it may be linked to positive duties like ‘you should help someone in need’; and even then, it is not immediately obvious that a shop assistant ending up with a negative balance can be seen as a person in need. As negative duties carry a stronger moral obligation than positive duties (Belliotti, 1981), the relation to a positive, weaker duty increases the ambiguity of the situation. Therefore, the moral content of the situation is not as obvious.…”