Moral Dilemma
A moral dilemma involves a situation in which the agent has onlytwo courses of action available, and each requires performing amorally impermissible action.. Plato presents the classic exampleof a moral dilemma. A man borrows a weapon from his neighborpromising to return it at his neighbors request. One day theneighbor in a fit of rage, asks for the weapon back apparently withthe intention to kill someone. The man is faced with a dilemma: ifhe keeps his promise, then he will be an accessory to a murder ifhe refuses to hand over the weapon, than he violates his promise. Amoral dilemma, then, is a situation, involving a choice between twoopposing courses of action, where there are moral considerations insupport of each course of action. Few would doubt whether we are infact faced with difficult moral choices. The question raised byphilosophers, though, is whether such dilemmas can besystematically resolved, or whether no systematic solution isavailable.

The most commonly suggested method of resolving conflicts betweenobligations is to appeal to the highest intrinsic good. A thing isintrinsically good when it is valued for itself and not merely asan instrument or means to some further end. Money is instrumentallygood since it only provides a means to some further good, such asthe purchase of a sports car. Music, on the other hand, is thoughtto be intrinsically good since it is valued for itself and not as ameans to something else. Moral philosophers are concerned withuncovering the highest intrinsic good - that which is at the apexof everything that is valued. Human happiness is a common candidatefor the highest intrinsic good since everyone strives forhappiness, and happiness appears to be the final goal of all ouractions. Other nominees for the highest intrinsic good arepleasure, human rationality, God’s will, free human choice, andhighly evolved conduct.

Theoretically, if we can determine that pleasure, for example, isthe highest intrinsic good, then conflicts between moralobligations would be resolved by determining which course of actionproduces the most pleasure. Similarly, if God’s will is determinedto be the highest intrinsic good, priority would be given to thoseactions which are most in accord with God’s will. Thus, by locatingthe highest intrinsic good, moral dilemmas are resolved byappealing to that concept.

Assignment
The following is a list of some moral dilemmas, mostly adapted fromMoral Reasoning, by Victor Grassian (Prentice Hall, 1981, 1992).Read each situation carefully.

You are to respond to the following directions for FOUR (4) of theeight dilemmas presented.

• Describe the decision that you would make in the situation andexplain. Why.
• Identify the moral theory/ethic (such as “I would follow myconscience,” “I would do what God or the scriptures say is right,”“I would follow the advice of an authority,” etc.) on which youbased your decision and explains how it applies to thissituation.
• At the conclusion of responding to four of the moral dilemmas,write a final paragraph in which you compare the moral values youpresented in your answers. State whether your answers consistentlyused the same theories/ethics or greatly varied. Based on youranalysis of your moral values presented above, describe yourgeneral conclusions about your own “moral compass.”
*You should have a total of five (5) paragraphs; each one should bebetween 4-8 sentences. Grammar and format count.




1. The Overcrowded Lifeboat
In 1842, a ship struck an iceberg and more than 30 survivors werecrowded into a lifeboat intended to hold 7. As a storm threatened,it became obvious that the lifeboat would have to be lightened ifanyone were to survive. The captain reasoned that the right thingto do in this situation was to force some individuals to go overthe side and drown. Such an action, he reasoned, was not unjust tothose thrown overboard, for they would have drowned anyway. If hedid nothing, however, he would be responsible for the deaths ofthose whom he could have saved. Some people opposed the captain’sdecision. They claimed that if nothing were done and everyone diedas a result, no one would be responsible for these deaths. On theother hand, if the captain attempted to save some; he could do soonly by killing others and their deaths would be hisresponsibility; this would be worse than doing nothing and lettingall die. The captain rejected this reasoning, since the onlypossibility for rescue required great effort of rowing, the captaindecided that the weakest would have to be sacrificed.. In thissituation it would be absurd, he thought, to decide by drawing lotswho should be thrown overboard. As it turned out, after days ofhard rowing, the survivors were rescued and the captain was triedfor his action. If you had been on the jury, how would you havedecided?

2. A Father’s Agonizing Choice
You are an inmate in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard isabout to hang your son who tried to escape and wants you to pullthe chair from underneath him. He says that if you don’t he willnot only kill your son but some other innocent inmate as well. Youdon’t have any doubt that he means what he says. What should youdo?

3. Sophie’s Choice
In the novel Sophie’s Choice, by William Styron (Vintage Books,1976 — the 1982 movie starred Meryl Steep & Kevin Kline), aPolish woman, Sophie Zawistowska, is arrested by the Nazis and sentto the Auschwitz death camp. On arrival, she is “honored” for notbeing a Jew by being allowed a choice: One of her children will bespared the gas chamber if she chooses which one. In an agony ofindecision, as both children are being taken away, she suddenlydoes choose. They can take her daughter, who is younger andsmaller. Sophie hopes that her older and stronger son will bebetter able to survive, but she loses track of him and never doeslearn of his fate. Did she do the right thing? Years later, hauntedby the guilt of having chosen between her children, Sophie commitssuicide. Should she have felt guilty?

4. The Fat Man and the Impending Doom
A fat man leading a group of people out of a cave on a coast isstuck in the mouth of that cave. In a short time high tide will beupon them, and unless he is unstuck, they will all be drownedexcept the fat man, whose head is out of the cave. [But,fortunately, or unfortunately, someone has with him a stick ofdynamite.] There seems no way to get the man loose without using[that] dynamite which will inevitably kill him; but if they do notuse it everyone will drown. What should they do?

5. A Callous Passerby
Roger Smith, a quite competent swimmer, is out for a leisurelystroll. During the course of his walk he passes by a deserted pierfrom which a teenage boy who apparently cannot swim has fallen intothe water. The boy s screaming for help Smith recognizes that thereis absolutely no danger to himself if he jumps into save the boy-hecould easily succeed if he tried. Nevertheless, he chooses toignore the boy’s cries. The water is cold and he is afraid ofcatching a cold — he doesn’t want to get his good clothes weteither. “Why should I inconvenience myself for this kid,” Smithsays to himself and passes on. Does - Smith have a moral obligationto save the boy? If so, should he have a legal obligation [“GoodSamaritan” laws] as well?


6. A Poisonous Cup of Coffee
Tom, hating his wife and wanting her dead, puts poison in hercoffee, thereby killing her. Joe also hates his wife and would likeher dead. One day, Joe’s wife accidentally puts poison in hercoffee, thinking it’s cream. Joe has the antidote, but he does notgive it to her. Knowing that he is the only one who can save her,he lets her die. Is Joe’s failure to act as bad as Tom’saction?

7. The Torture of the Mad Bomber
A madman who has threatened to explode several bombs in crowdedareas has been apprehended. Unfortunately, he has already plantedthe bombs and they are scheduled to go off in a short time. It ispossible that hundreds of people may die. The authorities cannotmake him divulge the location of the bombs by conventional methods.He refuses to say anything and requests a lawyer to protect his 5thamendment right against self-incrimination. In exasperation, somehigh level official suggests torture. This would be illegal, ofcourse, but the official thinks that it is nevertheless the rightthing to do this desperate situation. Do you agree? If you do,would it also be morally justifiable to torture the mad bomber’sinnocent wife if that is the only way to make him talk? Why?

8. The Partiality of Friendship
Jim has the responsibility of filling a position in his firm. Hisfriend Paul has applied and is qualified, but someone else seemseven more qualified. Jim wants to give the job to Paul, but hefeels guilty, believing that be ought to be impartial. That’s theessence of morality, he initially tells himself. This belief is,however, rejected, as Jim resolves that friendship has a moralimportance that permits, and perhaps even requires, partiality in,some circumstances. So he gives the job to Paul. Was he right?