[njc07_ethics_and_morality/Gladys/10S416]

The author in passage 1 states that “The bystander effect is watching some evil take place, but since we are watching with others who are watching, and no one seems to be doing anything about the evil, we go on watching and doing nothing about it”. The author says that the “bystander effect” is very prevalent in because of the nature of the effect itself. The bystander effect is that one’s actions are constantly affected by the society. One does not do anything without the society, or even another person doing the same thing first. It results in nothing being done, because no one wants to take the first step, even if it means to condone evil in society. I agree that the “bystander effect” is prevalent in society. This is also because of the fear of being judged by society. Should one stand up for his beliefs and moral values he is going against the grain of a common understanding in society. The fear of being labelled as “trying to be difficult” or being mocked at for being “old fashioned” drives people to be socially accepted through conforming to the ways of society.

The author in passage 2 states that “Accepting a low-level moral code during the day is bound to infiltrate one’s off-time judgment as well. “ The author says that long time spent with a society of amoral standards will influence one’s moral standards in the long run as well. This is the case where everyone’s moral standards are bouncing off each other. The existence of society itself allows the “bystander effect” to be prevalent as each person’s thoughts and moral standards are affected by the existence of society. I agree that this phenomenon is evident in society. This is because of loose morals in the society. Loose morals in a society will lead to one that condones many once deemed immoral acts. As such, people with strong morals will eventually be influenced to allow such views to stand. In Singapore, the once deemed impossible thought of divorce has been already accepted as the norm. In fact, divorce rates have increased steadily in Singapore since the 1990s. Thus, this shows that the loose morals itself has allowed the “bystander effect” of widespread acceptance of divorce in Singapore