Student Question
Do you agree with Walter Scott's metaphor that fruit belongs to those who climb the tree?
"He that climbs the tall tree has won the right to the fruit." - Sir Walter Scott
Quick answer:
One first glance, Walter Scott's metaphor that the fruit should go to the person who climbs the tree seems reasonable. However, as we begin to unpack it, we come to see that the situation is more complex. For example, infants or the elderly might need the metaphoric "fruit" and yet be unable to "climb." In an ethical society, they would nevertheless get a share. In short, the metaphor is limited and does not take into account extenuating circumstances.
Sir Walter Scott's statement that "he that climbs the tall tree has the right to the fruit" means that a person who does the work to obtain something is the person who has the right to that object. On the surface, this seems a reasonable enough assumption. Why shouldn't the person willing to do the work get the reward?
However, this statement, taken by itself, is overly simplistic. People don't exist as individual entities: community is a prerequisite for human survival if only because infants, unlike other extremely young animals, can't survive on their own.
As we unpack Scott's idea and understand that people live in communities for mutual benefit and survival, the question becomes more complicated. Should a toddler be denied the fruit at the top of tall tree because she is incapable of climbing for it herself? What if that is the only food? Does she deserve...
Unlock This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
to suffer malnutrition or starvation at a moment when her brain is forming because she is incapable of certain physical feats? What of an older person who might be weaker or for whom a fall could be more dangerous? Should that person be denied the fruit? What of a person has every willingness to climb but is prevented from doing so because of a disability?
Almost every society understands that a share of the "fruits" that some work for must be divided among those who are simply unable to do the work. Generally, ethics says that to from those to whom much has been given in terms of health, strength, brains, and other capacities, much is expected in return. Most societies understand that the gift to climb a tree is a grace that comes from whatever the culture defines as a divine source—the same divine source that creates the fruit a strong person can climb to get. Most societies believe these fruits must be used humbly and not greedily and in an ethical and graceful way that speaks to needs as well as ability.
While fruit should not perhaps be freely given to everybody—it is called the "black and white fallacy" to say there are only two extreme positions—a humane society generally makes generous provision for those who are not fully able. A fully abled young male who refuses to take his turn climbing the tree might be incentivized by losing his share of the fruit—a disabled old woman, however, should never be humiliated or starved because of her inability to climb.