Again — Yes. Absolutely. Conflict is the primary issue here. If I had spent that money on an new car or a grand holiday it would be relatively difficult to reconcile my own selfish actions with my denigration of greedy-self-interested-money- grabbing-bankers. In this case there would be conflict that I may well seek to resolve by some sort of self-justification or even more vitriolic advocacy of the evilness of bankers. But giving the money to charity means there is no such conflict.
It might. It might not. There probably are people so morally scrupulous that they always give their own money to charity instead of other people's. Good heavens, I'm one myself.
But sure, we can imagine someone who feels no moral conflict in stealing money to give it to charity, a letter-day Robin Hood, knock yourself out. However, in the example I gave, there
is a conflict. That was stipulated, it's part of the example. It is not a critique of the example that you can imagine a different person who has different thoughts and different motives and therefore does not feel conflicted, any more than it's a critique of my saying that an elephant is an example of a mammal to reply that you can imagine a hat-stand which is not an example of a mammal.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.