The Step Not Taken

Doing The Human Thing By: Paul D’Angelo
In the article The Step Not Taken, Paul D’Angelo recounts an experience where he exhibited the Bystander Effect when faced with a young man crying in his presence in an elevator. He is ashamed by his decision to leave the man alone and is doubtful when his friends and acquaintances tell him he did the right thing. Did he do the right thing? What is the Bystander Effect? In this article, I will explore this phenomenon and the nature of the situation that D’Angelo found himself in, and try to determine whether he should have tried to involve himself with the crying man.
First, what is it that paralysed D’Angelo when the young man began to cry in front of him? The Bystander Effect is the tendency for people to not react to someone’s calls for help if there are other people around. The more people present, the less a person is likely to take action. They feel as though someone else will intervene (The Bystander Effect). But there was no one else in the elevator other than Author and the young man, so what could have caused his hesitation?
The other aspect of the Bystander Effect is that it is related to people’s sense of what is normal in a social situation. If others do not act, we feel as though it would be inappropriate if we did (The Bystander Effect). In D’Angelo’s case, I believe that what caused his reaction is that the situation was abnormal and so he could not figure out what the socially appropriate way to react was or how the other person might respond.
The article details how well the young man was dressed and what a strong impression he gave before he broke down. It explains why it came off as such a shock to the author. Moreover, society teaches us that it is inappropriate to interfere in someone else’s personal life, no matter what the circumstances are, as proved by D’Angelo’s acquaintances telling him he did the right thing by not getting involved.
Second, D’Angelo asks himself what could have happened if he decided to ask the young man, what troubled him and made him so depress and some of the possibilities would have been very unpleasant. The man may have rejected D’Angelo’s act of kindness or may have even turned violent. But the man may have accepted help as well and the author might have prevented a potential tragedy. At the very least, he might have helped the crying man relax. We have become a society where we are taught to look after our own needs, even when we are not the ones who have a problem in a given situation. In my opinion, this attitude is abnormal and harmful because we are a society. We live in families, families live in communities, and communities make up cities, and so on. Our nature is to live with others and we are inter-dependant. We have a moral obligation to recognise that dependence and realise that sometimes, we should help others even when we do not gain from it. Someday, we might wish for the same act of kindness from a stranger too. The young man may not have reacted angrily because knowing that someone was concerned might have been what he needed. I also believe that because empathy is in our nature, not acting on it can cause psychological harms to our-selves. It caused the author a lot of stress and regret.
In conclusion, Paul D’Angelo’s reaction to the crying young man is understandable. He was faced with an unusual situation and was not sure what the appropriate thing to do was. Also, he did not know how the other person would react. However, these understandable human flaws need to be overcome so we can do “The right thing. The human thing.”

Works Cited:
“The Bystander Effect.” about.com. n.p., n.d. Web. Apr 10. 2013.

Cited: “The Bystander Effect.” about.com. n.p., n.d. Web. Apr 10. 2013.