system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
The Prince Thought Experiment

Imagine a long time ago, let's say in the 1400's, there lived an Indian prince named Viraj. The prince was brought up his whole life being cleaned, fed, and groomed entirely without him needing to do anything. He would wake up, walk to breakfast, sit down, and be fed. Then he would walk to his throne and sit all day until he was fed lunch, then dinner. He was then groomed and went to bed. And so on.

One day the prince embarks on a journey to travel to another land. Along the way, the prince's group of protectors were attacked by wild animals and all were killed except the prince. Traumatized, the prince walked until he found a village were many peasants lived. The prince was given shelter and warmth and began garnering a relationship with the people there. Once dinner time arrived, the prince was given food.

"What is this?" Prince Viraj asked.

"Food" a peasant said.

Angrily, the prince said "I understand that, but why is no one feeding it to me!"

Prince Viraj and the peasants argued for a few minutes on whether they should feed him the food, and eventually the peasants conclude that if he does not want to pick up and eat his own food, he would not eat at all. The next day comes, and the prince refuses to eat unless fed. And the next. Eventually three weeks have passed and the prince is utterly starving, if he does not get food in his stomach soon, he will perish...

&#x200B;

If the prince will not eat, do the peasants have a moral imperative to feed him in order to save him from dying?
gpt
>If the prince will not eat, do the peasants have a moral imperative to feed him in order to save him from dying?

Yeah sure. As things go that you ought to do to prevent someone from dying a horrible death feeding them is pretty low down on the list of inconvenient and unpleasant things you should still do.