Poorman's Ethicist - Volume 1

I've been whining lately about change. again. There are some things we never let go of and I am still struggling with format revisions to the New York Times Magazine. There've been scant few changes in the history of the magazine and there were certain things I could count on week-after-week. Four features stood out: On Language, The Ethicist, the Back page "memoir" and my trusty puzzle(s). I don't know when I started reading the Ethicist but Randy Cohen has made such an impact on me and how I think about why we do what we do that I wanted to opine briefly a la Randy Cohen (sort of a tip of my hat). Estimable Mr Cohen - if you're out there and listening please affirm/debunk my response to the question posed me this morning. And thank you for never stooping to name calling... This is meant to be humorous so give me a break if you don't agree with my ethical assessment... JC, thanks for the smile this morning.

I didn't have breakfast this morning and was taking the bus in, thinking about how much I'd like a bowl of Honey Nut Cheerios. When I got into the office, I noticed in the break room a full box of Honey Nut Cheerios in the food drive container. Am I wrong to even have thoughts about taking the box of cheerios? What if I replaced it? -- J.C., Denver

J.C., you are not wrong to have thoughts about taking the box of cheerios but you are wrong if you do take the box even if you replace it. It seems innocuous enough but whether or not you replace the box, a line has been crossed - that the intended recipient has not been polled for nor has given consent and that taking the box constitutes theft. It would be reasonable to assume that once you've crossed this line, you would apply the same logic that got you here to other scenarios where the "victim" of the crime has a face.

The only circumstance where you have a defensible right to these Cheerios are where you are a) literally starving and b) haven't the immediate wherewithal (funds, access to food sources) to address your need and c) will replace the product in a timely fashion, guaranteed. Some qualifiers below on c.

What does replacement mean when we're talking about a real product (not a service)? If the box of Cheerios is 20 oz, you must replace with an unopened 20 oz box or larger - smaller is short-changing. You must notice the expiration date of the Cheerios. If they expire on 11.May.2015, you must replace with a box that expires after this date - no fair replacing with an old box that is already expired from your pantry.

What is timely? The shorter the duration between your "borrowing" the box and your replacement described above, the better. It would be reasonable to assume 24 hrs but under the constraint that you MUST replace the box before it is due to be picked up or delivered.

What guarantees will be made and what if you are unable to act on those guarantees? This is where it gets gray. I assume a promissory note is a sufficient binding vehicle to ensure repayment in the unlikely event you are struck by a bus or lightning prior to being able to replace and therefore the replacement falls to your estate. On the other end of the spectrum is a hand-written IOU. Maybe this isn't sufficient... Place the "marker" in the food drive bin before you take the product out - put the replacement product in before removing and destroying the guarantee of replacement.