We often judge a book by its coverㅡ we tend to think of them based on a mere thing we see, not knowing the whole story. Just like in the video, the dog judged the bird that stole worms from the bucket, while the man scolded the dog without knowing that the dog was only trying to protect the worms. After seeing the truth about the bird bothering the bucket full of worms, the man chased the bird away and that's also when the dog saw the bird's situationㅡ it's problem on feeding it's chicks. Conscience, which is the moral goodness or blameworthiness of one's own conduct, is the bottomline of the story. The characters had a feeling of obligation to do right after judging each otherㅡ the dog gave worms to the stealing bird, and in return, the bird gave fish to the cautious dog. This tells that all of us has our own regard for fairness and justice.
Based on this show, what the author is indicating is that even if you know you are right, there is still time to let it go even if you know there will be punishment or opposition when you do that. Here what the author feels is leading by pity and conscience where you choose to give what you know should not be given even though you know it is difficult and you are not sure of the outcome of what you have done.
I was looking for a video to use in class, that is the theme... but I couldn't imagine it would be that touching. I hope my students like it as much as I do. 👏
The moral dilemma is obviously whether the dog should bark to "maybe" alert his owner to the presence of the bird which in turn could risk him being "ssshhhhed" for barking at seemingly nothing or to remain silent and not run the risk. The dog seeing the birds family and giving them a few worms was not the dilemma as that was not a difficult choice because anyone would have done it. However, few would speak up for what's right if they knew they ran the risk of themselves being punished because of it.
But what about his loyalty to his owner, since he gave worms (which are not his right but is entrusted to them by his owner) to save the lives of the chicks and fill their hunger ,,,,. In fact, he betrayed his owner to save the chicks, herein lies the moral dilemma
But what about his loyalty to his owner, since he gave worms (which are not his right but is entrusted to them by his owner) to save the lives of the chicks and fill their hunger ,,,,. In fact, he betrayed his owner to save the chicks, herein lies the ethical dilemma Sometimes, we pushed to do bad things which is infact,,, the right one
@@ahmadodeh7099 His loyalty to his owner was never in question, he proved that multiple times during the video. Giving a few worms to a starving family just before they both left was not a betrayal of trust, no, the bate was no longer needed therefore alright to give away.
Its surprizing that none of the commentors followed the title of the video i.e. no one analyzed the video. I would like to give my view about this supposed dilemma.. The video is good because it shows why we need to think broadly, beyond our duties and results of immediate actions. Sometimes far reaching consequences of our actions are not what they look like. It shows sentiments and tell us to empathize about others. People and animals around us struggle very hard to feed their families. But if you are asking to analyze it on moral grounds then I would also like to think about the families of those animals (like crabs, snails, snakes etc.) who were caught by that human fisherman. Man is catching the sea animals for himself, his family, the dog, and other animals at his home. The pelican is catching food too in a seemingly easy way where it doesnt have to hunt for the animals directly in the sea. The animals who were caught could also be attempting to seek food. So it is part of a food chain. Harm of one is benefit of the other. I wonder and do not understand that why empathy is expected to be taken so selectively here. Empathize for pelican and its kids? But what about the crab that was killed and the dead snakes/snails that were lying inside that tub/mug ? These poor animals also lost their lives for the enjoyment of one fihserman. He is killing for fun but animals killed to eat. So I believe the question arises whose JOY is really there ? Dog, after empathizing with pelican or man's whose motive was different than dog or pelican's ?
The baby birds rejecting the fish does not make me feel empathy for them or the parent bird. I understand it is because the chunks are too large to digest, but that is why birds "eat" their caught food, digest it, and regurgitate it into the baby's mouths. The dog and man are well within their rights to protect their worms, as the bird has no right to them even if the chicks are hungry. Beyond that, the worms arent even for the dog to give away - they belong to the man. It's funny how generous one can be when you're giving away someone else's earnings. In the sense of intelligent animals being a thing, the dog could have alerted the man to the birds' situation and let the man make the decision. Nature sucks sometimes. You can't be there to save it all the time. Saving an animal life there is condemning the lives of the animals it is going to hunt later in life. It's a part of conservation not to feed wild animals unless their food has been unjustly taken as a result of human interference.
That is why it is called moral conflicts,,,, you see this and i see that,,,, you are right,,,, may be i am right ,,,, both🤔 of us my be right, me be wrong
@@ahmadodeh7099 apologies, but that didn't make any sense. You didn't provide any coherent argument or even present what your view is. You just stated a generic "hmm interesting" that doesn't propel the conversation anywhere. Do you have anything to actually add other than fake wisdom?
@@aetherblackbolt1301 with all respect,,,,, but your way in discussion is harsh,,,,, I respect your point of view and i told simply, the things that you sometimes see it black, i see it white So why you are not fare in accepting my point of view Another thing,,,,, the story and what it reflects has no relation to the reality and what birds eat Lock to the inside of the story not what you see directly Any way, most welcome Any way,,,,, most welcome
We often judge a book by its coverㅡ we tend to think of them based on a mere thing we see, not knowing the whole story. Just like in the video, the dog judged the bird that stole worms from the bucket, while the man scolded the dog without knowing that the dog was only trying to protect the worms. After seeing the truth about the bird bothering the bucket full of worms, the man chased the bird away and that's also when the dog saw the bird's situationㅡ it's problem on feeding it's chicks. Conscience, which is the moral goodness or blameworthiness of one's own conduct, is the bottomline of the story. The characters had a feeling of obligation to do right after judging each otherㅡ the dog gave worms to the stealing bird, and in return, the bird gave fish to the cautious dog. This tells that all of us has our own regard for fairness and justice.
Chapeau bas
Its an eye opener.. actions can speak louder then voice...
It's a great video , the moral dilemma is not to judge others and when you help others you feel happy
Based on this show, what the author is indicating is that even if you know you are right, there is still time to let it go even if you know there will be punishment or opposition when you do that. Here what the author feels is leading by pity and conscience where you choose to give what you know should not be given even though you know it is difficult and you are not sure of the outcome of what you have done.
I was looking for a video to use in class, that is the theme... but I couldn't imagine it would be that touching. I hope my students like it as much as I do. 👏
Owwwwww l now understand it 🤔😘
It's so beautiful !! I was looking for moral videos to use in class and It's fantastic...I love the values that it gives us.
This video is just incredibly heart-wrenching, I'm so happy that this had a good ending🤗🤗🤗🤗🤗
Nice video. And nice guitar playing!
i love it i am in class online and my mam show this to me in ME class....
God bless your mam
@@ahmadodeh7099 thx
Touching the heart
BIG FAN
جميل جدا ومبدع 👍
Back for another viewing! Fabulous!
Thank you
Yes you’re right
estaba muy bonito 😍😍😍😍😍🥰🥰🥰🥰🥰😊😊😊
Superb
THIS DOG IS SUPER CUTE....😍😍😍
Sweet Tart no it’s nightmare fuel
Give it to people who need it more than you need.
amazing
wow
The moral dilemma is obviously whether the dog should bark to "maybe" alert his owner to the presence of the bird which in turn could risk him being "ssshhhhed" for barking at seemingly nothing or to remain silent and not run the risk. The dog seeing the birds family and giving them a few worms was not the dilemma as that was not a difficult choice because anyone would have done it. However, few would speak up for what's right if they knew they ran the risk of themselves being punished because of it.
But what about his loyalty to his owner, since he gave worms (which are not his right but is entrusted to them by his owner) to save the lives of the chicks and fill their hunger ,,,,. In fact, he betrayed his owner to save the chicks, herein lies the moral dilemma
But what about his loyalty to his owner, since he gave worms (which are not his right but is entrusted to them by his owner) to save the lives of the chicks and fill their hunger ,,,,. In fact, he betrayed his owner to save the chicks, herein lies the ethical dilemma
Sometimes, we pushed to do bad things which is infact,,, the right one
@@ahmadodeh7099 His loyalty to his owner was never in question, he proved that multiple times during the video. Giving a few worms to a starving family just before they both left was not a betrayal of trust, no, the bate was no longer needed therefore alright to give away.
this is too cute
جميل جداً
What is the title of this video? It's Nice
Its surprizing that none of the commentors followed the title of the video i.e. no one analyzed the video. I would like to give my view about this supposed dilemma..
The video is good because it shows why we need to think broadly, beyond our duties and results of immediate actions. Sometimes far reaching consequences of our actions are not what they look like. It shows sentiments and tell us to empathize about others. People and animals around us struggle very hard to feed their families.
But if you are asking to analyze it on moral grounds then I would also like to think about the families of those animals (like crabs, snails, snakes etc.) who were caught by that human fisherman. Man is catching the sea animals for himself, his family, the dog, and other animals at his home. The pelican is catching food too in a seemingly easy way where it doesnt have to hunt for the animals directly in the sea. The animals who were caught could also be attempting to seek food. So it is part of a food chain. Harm of one is benefit of the other. I wonder and do not understand that why empathy is expected to be taken so selectively here. Empathize for pelican and its kids? But what about the crab that was killed and the dead snakes/snails that were lying inside that tub/mug ? These poor animals also lost their lives for the enjoyment of one fihserman. He is killing for fun but animals killed to eat. So I believe the question arises whose JOY is really there ? Dog, after empathizing with pelican or man's whose motive was different than dog or pelican's ?
Great
Hi classmates!
He's my uncle in rl
Like si estas aquí por un trabajo en la escuela :v
Sorry,,,, but i do not understand you,,,,, sorry
If you can say it by English
Poor puppy 🐶
Gla University wale like karo👇👇
Title pls
Gülümcan on classic guitar
Hello
ㅇ
hi
The baby birds rejecting the fish does not make me feel empathy for them or the parent bird. I understand it is because the chunks are too large to digest, but that is why birds "eat" their caught food, digest it, and regurgitate it into the baby's mouths. The dog and man are well within their rights to protect their worms, as the bird has no right to them even if the chicks are hungry.
Beyond that, the worms arent even for the dog to give away - they belong to the man. It's funny how generous one can be when you're giving away someone else's earnings. In the sense of intelligent animals being a thing, the dog could have alerted the man to the birds' situation and let the man make the decision.
Nature sucks sometimes. You can't be there to save it all the time. Saving an animal life there is condemning the lives of the animals it is going to hunt later in life. It's a part of conservation not to feed wild animals unless their food has been unjustly taken as a result of human interference.
That is why it is called moral conflicts,,,, you see this and i see that,,,, you are right,,,, may be i am right ,,,, both🤔 of us my be right, me be wrong
@@ahmadodeh7099 apologies, but that didn't make any sense. You didn't provide any coherent argument or even present what your view is. You just stated a generic "hmm interesting" that doesn't propel the conversation anywhere. Do you have anything to actually add other than fake wisdom?
@@aetherblackbolt1301 with all respect,,,,, but your way in discussion is harsh,,,,,
I respect your point of view and i told simply, the things that you sometimes see it black, i see it white
So why you are not fare in accepting my point of view
Another thing,,,,, the story and what it reflects has no relation to the reality and what birds eat
Lock to the inside of the story not what you see directly
Any way, most welcome
Any way,,,,, most welcome
What ethical theory that and why?
HAHAHAHA magtanong ka kay cesar
@@ramshanefernandez6270 wahahha potek umabot ka dto
the puppy are very good :D
the dog is cute :3
somes parts are sads xD