Final answer:
The difference between building consideration and driving action lies in the focus on underlying motivations versus immediate, practical outcomes of behavior. Building consideration delves into the moral value of actions based on intention and consequence. In contrast, driving action emphasizes practical strategies and immediate goals, such as survival in an urgent situation.
Step-by-step explanation:
When we talk about the difference between building consideration and driving action, we are navigating the complex landscape of human behavior and intentionality. Building consideration entails a reflective and often introspective process, foregrounding the reasons and motivations behind actions. For example, when we think about the goodness of an action, we might analyze whether the intention behind the act contributes to its value.
In contrast, driving action focuses more on the immediate and practical aim of accomplishing a goal. Reflecting on Robert Cohen's illustration with the person running from a bear, the individual is not deliberating on the motivation but is concentrating on survival strategies such as 'How will I get into the cabin?' This highlights an orientation towards practicalities and forward progress, rather than abstract analysis.
The consideration of actions in moral theory also brings forth the dilemma of measuring benefits and harms and the evidence supporting them. This could relate to everyday risk-benefit scenarios, such as speeding, which presents clear dangers but also immediate benefits to the driver. Hence, figuring out what constitutes a benefit or a harm is pivotal.
From a writing perspective, when characters and actions are emphasized clearly in sentences, it makes the narrative more engaging and understandable to readers. For instance, contrasting Example 1 and Example 2 with regards to Jack, the former focuses on nouns while the latter aligns characters with verbs, thus giving more prominence to the actions being undertaken.