Question

Hello Rabbi Michael, A person is in a certain complex situation and recognizes that there is some moral action that ought to be taken, and indeed, from the perspective of an outside observer, everyone would agree that this is the moral course of action to take. However, that person is under certain pressures that affect him (an authority figure, society, etc.), and by nature that person also often gives in to these kinds of pressures and does not go “against the current”—and in the end he acts against the dictates of his conscience. Did that person really commit an act of an immoral character? On the one hand, one could say that he should not have given in to the pressures operating on him, and that he in fact chose to give in to those pressures rather than act according to his moral imperative, and therefore he actually took an immoral action. On the other hand, he was simply weak and unable to withstand the pressure, and perhaps we should regard him as coerced. And therefore, just as we would not blame a person who was unable to rescue a baby from a burning building (not because he did not want to, but because it was beyond human ability), so too perhaps we should not come to blame that same person who by nature gives in to pressures exerted on him. I hope I phrased the question well; I would be glad to hear your response.