Exit-Row Exigencies - NYTimes.com I was thankful to secure an exit-row middle seat with ample legroom on a recent Australian domestic flight. I duly read the instructions and carefully listened to the crew briefing about operating the exit door in an emergency. But the man sitting at the window seat requested several alcoholic drinks and was becoming visibly intoxicated during evening dinner service. Should an exit-row passenger exercise self-control by abstaining from alcohol consumption, or is it the airline's responsibility to limit alcohol use for exit-row passengers? The obvious answer here is that no one sitting in an exit row should be drinking at all, and the airline should not be serving cocktails to people who are potentially responsible for the lives of other passengers. There's no other argument. That said, I feel a little ridiculous taking a hard-line stance, because virtually no one thinks about the exit row in this manner. It's just a deeper seat for tall people. The odds of anything happening during a flight are remote, the likelihood that a passenger's response could make a difference is even more improbable and most intoxicated people could still open an exit door. From a practical standpoint, I would trust an intoxicated Australian more than most sober Americans. But you're asking a straightforward question about the nature of responsibility, so there's no room for debate. The cost of extra legroom is a degree of self-control. I recently moved into a rent-stabilized building, which means the landlord is allowed to raise the rent only a certain amount every year and a bit more when the tenant changes. I am happy to pay the new rent, which would be $1,400 on a two-bedroom apartment. But a neighbor told me that she believes the landlord illegally raised the rent and submitted bogus forms to whatever agency is in charge of the whole rent-stabilization process, claiming that work done by the last tenant was done by a contractor. I have no idea what any of this means, and I do not really care. Do I have an ethical obligation to look into this matter? Sure, it's in my self-interest to try to figure it out, but it seems hard and potentially destructive to my relationship with my landlord. Also, I am in college and my parents are paying my rent, so do I have to tell them? Obviously, I am looking to do nothing in this matter. Is that cool? You're a slacker, but you pose a valid question: Are people ethically obligated to do what's best for themselves, even if they don't particularly care about the benefit? Most of the time, I would say no. If you were paying for this apartment yourself, it would be your prerogative to ignore the dilemma, because figuring out what you owe will indeed be a complicated hassle that will most likely result in your landlord's liking you less. It's O.K. to value simplicity more than money. This specific money, however, is not yours. You're spending (and possibly wasting) your parents" generosity. This must be addressed. You are not living inside an episode of "Girls." Here's what you should do: Go to your neighbor and admit you don't understand tenant law or the history of the building. Ask her to explain why she suspects you're being overcharged. Take this information to your landlord and politely explain your case (assuming there actually is a case to make; it's possible your neighbor is crazy, because a lot of New Yorkers obsessed with other people's housing problems skew in that direction). If the landlord balks, concede nothing (but do not raise your voice or threaten to break the lease). Inform your parents about the situation, again admitting that you don't understand how this process works (because I don't think you do). It's possible that they won't care about the money, either. But if they do care, informing them makes it a shared responsibility. I've just bought an apartment and discovered that my downstairs neighbors smoke on their terrace (rather than inside their own apartment). They smoke under our living room, and the passive smoke enters through our open windows. Is it ethical to smoke outside your own apartment (and thereby send your smoke to others), or must you smoke inside your own apartment and assume full responsibility of the habit? My inclination is to tell you to relax and let your neighbors live, but I can't do that. Your central point is correct: smokers can't make the argument that they deserve the right to smoke while refusing to have their own home smell like cigarettes. Tell them to stay inside. If they argue that they don't like how the smoke impacts the interior of their apartment, they've pretty much proved your point. I buy standing-room tickets for performances. Is it ethical to take an empty seat, which of course costs more than my ticket, before the curtain goes up or during first intermission? You can't take the seat before a performance starts. People are allowed to be late. But once an event is (roughly) half over, you can occupy whatever wasted space you find.