The Suffering Of Others And Its History

0 / 5. 0

The suffering of others and its history


There are many moral dilemmas in life. Almost every day we have to solve some, but most of them have become routine, and we no longer see them. Other moral dilemmas give us sleepless night. Happily are something weird. Some moral dilemmas ask ‘alone’ the right decisions. I put the word only in quotes, because there often there is no correct solution. Other dilemmas cost us money when we want to solve them, and that may be the problem. Here is such a case. I had to think about it when I read an article by a newspaper this morning. 


First, the philosophical description: Pepe suffers from a serious illness, although he will not die of it. But as he is now 20, he can mean 80 years of intense pain and terrible treatments. Let’s say your suffering is 100 on a scale of 0-100. Fortunately, there is a medicine that relieves your illness, but there is a problem: it will make another person, say your brother, also suffer from the rest of his life, say at level 90. In addition, Pepe’s suffering will only decrease to level 90. Would we do this? Probably not.

So and fortunately an intelligent researcher develops a new medicine. Will heal Pepe, but it’s very, very expensive. Insurance does not want to pay it and Pepe can’t pay it. Happily, the country is governed by the Radical Left Environment Party, which managed to make people of this country the happiest in the world. He wants to keep it that way, and as the entire state budget has already been spent on happiness and health, he wants to enter an additional tax. 

There is a problem: the level of suffering of each inhabitant of the country is 0 on the scale we have just mentioned (with the exception of Pepe, of course) and will increase to 1 due to this ‘John Recovery Tax’. But nobody will notice the increase, and Parliament agrees with the new tax. Although liberals vote against the bill in principle, in their hearts they think it was the right decision. 

And so, Pepe obtains his medicine and his level of suffering is reduced to the general level of 1 (because he also had to pay his part in the new tax). That was what I was thinking after having read the newspaper article this morning. It was a child who suffers from a metabolic disease that is so rare that the pharmaceutical industry does not want to invest money in the development of a new medication. In addition, your insurance company and the State do not want to do it. 

So the child and his parents are alone and can only expect that they can gather enough money through collective financing for future investigations that can help the child. However, the State could easily solve the problem by spending a small part of the Public Health Budget or the Research Fund for the Development of a Medication. Because it is better that many (the taxpayers) suffer a little (and nobody will notice) that one suffers a lot. 

But, unfortunately, my story doesn’t end here. Shortly after Pepe’s recovery tax law had passed to Parliament, there were general elections. Since many people now thought that they could become even happier if they were alone, the liberals were the great winners and could form the new government. A month later, it was learned that Ana was sick of a different disease, which would also bring her a suffering for life.

Although she could also be 100 years old with her illness. Etc. But who would notice it if the national level of suffering increased to 2? No one. So the Left Radical Environment Party, now in opposition, presented a ‘Ana Recovery Tax Law’. However, the liberals rejected the bill, not only on the grounds that it is better to be alone, but also because, as they argued, there are 6.000 rare diseases. 

Maybe everyone can be cured, but if the government had to pay it, things would go out of hand and, in the end, everyone will suffer significantly: each new case would raise the national level of suffering a point. So the government did nothing and Ana had to face alone and, from that moment, everyone else with a rare disease. Only Pepe was lucky, because the new government respected the decision of the old Parliament to support him.

The Radical Left Environment Party realized that 6,000 rare diseases is enough, in fact, and proposed to create a help fund for minimal support for each patient, on condition that the national level of suffering did not exceed 5,But the government rejected this proposal, also. So, the problem is this: how much suffering is acceptable for a population that would not suffer if I ignored the suffering of the unhappy few? You cannot support everyone’s burden, but this does not imply that you do not have to do anything when others suffer, certainly not if you do not realize that you support a burden.


In conclusion, what someone can endure and wants to endure is their responsibility, but this should not mean that everyone must be alone and worry only about the problems and solutions (such as being politics in some countries). Well this is my little reflection on how the government, in almost all countries of the world, has no efficient programs to take care of its citizens, and as everything could radically change if state collection would be better used.

Free The Suffering Of Others And Its History Essay Sample

Related samples

Zika virus: Transmission form Introduction The Zika virus belongs to the Flaviviradae family, was found for the first time in a monkey called Rhesus febrile and in...

Zika virus: cases and prevention Introduction The World Health Organization (WHO) has confirmed that Zika is a virus caused through the mosquito bite which is...

Zeus The King of Greek mythology Introduction Zeus is the Olympic God of heaven and thunder, the king of all other gods and men and, consequently, the main figure...

Zeus's punishment to Prometheus Introduction Prometheus, punished by Zeus Prometheus, punished by Zeus. Prometheus is a ‘cousin’ of Zeus. He is the son of the...


Leave feedback

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *