Moral Dilemma
Moral Dilemma
What people feel morally obligated to do depends on the situation. In general, I think everyone can agree that it is immoral to take someone’s life, but there are situations where people might think otherwise. There are also other less severe circumstances where people’s morals are put in question. In the end, it depends on one’s personal moral beliefs on how they would act when in certain instances.
The first dilemma I chose was the fat man and the impending doom. Without a doubt, I would choose to blow up the fat man if this situation were to incur. The group should collectively agree that one man’s life is equal to every other group member’s life. Thus, it makes no sense saving one person and having the rest drown. I think it would be better to let one man die for the sake of a group of people. The pregnant lady scenario is a little tougher because she has an unborn child inside of her and generally people would feel guilty blowing her up with the stick of dynamite. Both scenarios are tough for whoever lights the dynamite but it’s in the best interest of the whole group. So, even if the lady was pregnant, I think her life is not equivalent to the entire group’s lives, and it would be better to blow her up as well. Though it isn’t morally correct to take anyone’s life, I think in this situation it’s different because you are taking one person’s life to save many others.
The second dilemma I chose was called the partiality of friendship. Jim was wrong in the situation. Friendship does have moral importance, but not in a professional standpoint. When it comes to anything business related, personal life should not get involved. However, when Jim decided to let his friend get the job, he was letting his personal life get in the way of his work life. Yet these two things should be always kept separate. Even if it was a family member applying for the job, Jim should not let him or her get the advantage over other people that may be more
What people feel morally obligated to do depends on the situation. In general, I think everyone can agree that it is immoral to take someone’s life, but there are situations where people might think otherwise. There are also other less severe circumstances where people’s morals are put in question. In the end, it depends on one’s personal moral beliefs on how they would act when in certain instances.
The first dilemma I chose was the fat man and the impending doom. Without a doubt, I would choose to blow up the fat man if this situation were to incur. The group should collectively agree that one man’s life is equal to every other group member’s life. Thus, it makes no sense saving one person and having the rest drown. I think it would be better to let one man die for the sake of a group of people. The pregnant lady scenario is a little tougher because she has an unborn child inside of her and generally people would feel guilty blowing her up with the stick of dynamite. Both scenarios are tough for whoever lights the dynamite but it’s in the best interest of the whole group. So, even if the lady was pregnant, I think her life is not equivalent to the entire group’s lives, and it would be better to blow her up as well. Though it isn’t morally correct to take anyone’s life, I think in this situation it’s different because you are taking one person’s life to save many others.
The second dilemma I chose was called the partiality of friendship. Jim was wrong in the situation. Friendship does have moral importance, but not in a professional standpoint. When it comes to anything business related, personal life should not get involved. However, when Jim decided to let his friend get the job, he was letting his personal life get in the way of his work life. Yet these two things should be always kept separate. Even if it was a family member applying for the job, Jim should not let him or her get the advantage over other people that may be more