Sone Moral Dilemmas 7

Vhat do you think of B's reply? Is there some essential connection

between a person's actual behavior and the moral beliefs he accepts?
How do youusee the nature of this connection?

2. SOME MORAL DILEMMAS

In each of the following cases try to extract the underlying moral

principle that justifies the moral position you take. Be on guard for a
moral principle that you are indined to use in one example but not in
another. When this happens, ask vourself what differences there are in
the two cases that incline vou to reat them differently.
As you proceed through these moral dilemmas, see if there is some
set of general moral priniples on which sou consistently rely. Is it pos
sible for your moral priniples to be aranged in some type of hierarchi
cal order where ertain basic general moral principles are used as a
means of justifying derivative ones but are themselves incapable of justi
fhcation in terms of some higher level moral principle? Do you accept
more than one basic moral principle? If so, can they not conflict, and
how would you choose among tlhem in such a case? Can you justify your
choice of basic moral principles: Ponder these questions as you consider
the moral dilemmas. After we have critically studied some general theories
of normative ethics provided by famous philosophers, we may inquire as
to how these philosophers would resolve our moral dilemmas. Most im
portant, after having subjeted your own moral views to reasoned criti
cism, you may find that your initial reations to tlhese moral dilemmas
have themelves undergone xome dgree of change or developnent.
1. The 0vercrowded Lifeboat

In 1842, a ship struck an iccberg and more than 30 survivors were

crowded into a lifeboat intended to hold only 7. As a storm threatened,
it became obvious that the lifeboat would have to be lightened of its
human load if anyone were to survive. The captain reasoned that the
right thing to do in this situation was to force some individuals to go
over the side and drown. Such an action, he reasoned, was not unjust to
those thrown overboard, for they would have drowned anyway. If he did
nothing, however, he would be responsible for the deaths of those whom
he could have saved. Some people oppoed the aptain's decision. They
cdaimed that if nothing were done and everyone died as a result, no one
would be responsilble for these deaths. On the other hand, if the captain
attempted to save some, he would be able to do so only by killing others
and their deaths would be his responsibility. It was claimed that this
would be worse than doing nothing and leting all die. The captain re
jected this reasoning and decided that he must throw some people over
board. Since the only possibility for resxcue required great efforts of row
ing by the survivors, the captain decided that the weakest would have to
 THE NATURE OF MORAL REASONING

De sacrificed. In this situation, it would be absurd, he thought, to decide

by drawing lots who should be thrown overboard.
As it turned out, after days of hard rowing. the survivors were
rescued and the captain was tried for his action. If you were on the jury.
how would you have decided? Why?

2. AFather's Agonizing Choice

You are an inmate in a concentration camp. A sadistic guard is
about vour son who tried to escape and wants you to pull the
from underneath him. He says that if you don't he will not only kill
chair from
your son but some other innocent inmate as well. You don't have any
doubt that he means what he says. What should you do?

3. The Fat Man and the Impending Doom

A fat man leading a group of people out of a cave on a coast is

stuck in the mouth of that ave. In a very short time high tide will be
upon them, and unles he is pronmptlv unstuck, they will all be drowned
except the fat man, whose lhead is out of the cave. But, fortunately, or
unfortunately. someone has with him a stick of dynamite. There seems
no way to get the tat man loose from the opening without using that
dynamite which willinevitably kill him: but if they do not use it every
one will drown. What should they do?

4. Jean Valjean's Conscience

In Victor Hugo's Les Miserables, the hero, Jean Valjean, is an ex
convict, living illegally under an assumed name and wanted for a rob
bery he coted many years ago. Alhough he will be returned to the
galleys. or life, if he is caught, he is a good man who does not
deserve to be punished. He has established himself in a town, becoming
mayor and a public benefactor. One day. Jean learns that another man,
a vagabond, has been arested for a minor crime and identified as Jean
Valjean. Jean is first tempted to remain quiet, reasoning to himself that
since he had nothing to do with the false identification of the hapless
vagabond, he has no obligation to save him. Perbaps this man's false
identification, Jean reflects, is "an act of Providence meant to save me."
Upon reflection, however. Jean judges such reavoning "monstrous and
hypocritical" He now feels certain that it is his duty to reveal his iden
tity, regardless of the disastrous personal consequences. His resolve is
disturbed, however. as he reflects on the shattering and ireparalble harm
his return to the galleys will mean to so many people who depend upon
him for their livelihood espeially troubling is a helpless woman and
her small child to whom he eels a special obligation. He now reproaches
 Some Moral Dilemmas 9

self for being too selfish, for thinking only of his own conscience and
of others. The right thing to do, he now cdaims to himself, is to re
n quiet, to continue making money, while using it to help others.
vagabond, he now comforts himself, is not a wort1y person, anyway.
unconvinced and tomented by the decision he must make, Jean
to the trial and confesses. Did he do the right thing?

5. A Callous Passerby

Roger Smith, a quite competent swimmer, is out for a leisurely

stroll. During the course of his walk he passes by a deserted pier from
which a teenage boy who apparently cannot swim has fallen into the
water. The boy is screaming for help. Smith recognizes that there is
absolutely no danger to himself it be jumnps in to save the boy. He could
easily succeed if he tried. Nevertheless, he chooses to ignore the boy's
cries. The water is cold, Smith thinks to himself, and he is afraid of
catthing a cold and doesn't want to get his good clothes wet either. "Why
should I inconvenience myself for this kid." Smith says to himself, and
passes on. Does Smith have a moral obligation to save the boy? lf so,
should he have a legal obligation as well? Why?

6. APoisonous Cup of Coffee

Tom, hating his wife and wanting her dead, puts poison in her
coffee, thereby killing her. Joe also hates his wife and would like her
dead. One day, Joe's wife accidentally puts poison in her coffee, thinking
it's cream. Joe, who happens to be a chemist, has the antidote, but he
does not give 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's action? Why or
why not?

7. The Torture of the Mad Bomber

A madman who has already killed many people by planting bombs

in rowded areas has finally been apprehended. it is known, however,
that this fiend has already planted several bombs which are scheduled to
go off in a very short time. It is possible that hundreds of people may
die. The authorities seem unable to mke kim divulge the lxation of
the bombs by conventional methods. He refuses to say anything and his
lawyer is there to protet his fifth amendment right against self-incrimi
nation. Finally, in exasperation, some high-leveloficial suggests that some
type of truth serum or, if neessary, torture, be used to prevent the loom
ing tragedy. This would, of coure, be illegal, but the ofhial thinks that
it is nevertheless the right thing to do in this desperate situation. Do you
agree? lf vou do, would it also be morally justifable to toture the nad

9of 433 |O
 10 THE NATURE OF MORAL. REASONING

bomber'ss innocent wife if that is the only way to make him talk? Why?
If you believe that this would be wrong, how do you square this with
vour view concerning the morality of war?

"**)3. Political Assassination

You are the director of the CLA. A mentally unstable tyrant is in
control of a small nation and is ruthlessly killing his real and imagined
opposition. He has, however, assumed control legally. You are presented
with a plan to have him assassinated which you think has a good chance
of succeeding. Should you go ahead? If it depends, on what does it de
pend?

9. Involuntary Euthanasia and the Common Good

Most of us would feel great moral repugnance at the Nazi program

of involuntary euthanasia of the chronically and hopelesly ill, the in
sane, the senile, and congenital idiots. The rationale given for this pro
gram by the Nazis was that the immense amnount of money it would cost
to care for such pcople could be better spent on social programs for those
with greater capacities for meaningful lives. Indeed, with current tech
nology, the bodies of the vitims of involuntary euthanasia would pro
vide "spare parts" to save the lives or greatly increase the quality of life
of many pople with much greater otential for meaningtul life. "This
is Wrong," most of us will say. "It is wrong to sacrifice people for the
common good like this." Yet if this is so, how can we justify having, let
us say, 60 mile per hour speed limits, when we know that a 55 mile per
hour speed limit would save a consilerable number of lives? Are we not
in this ase sarifhcing innocent lives for the common good? Furthermore,
many pcople feel justiied in sacrilicing innocent lives for the greater
good in a war. What, if anything. are the relevant moral differences in
these cases?

10. The Cog in an Unjust System

You have just been offereds a high P city
Cy
(overnment. If vou attempt to bck the . you will be
at once and a person witlh fewer sruples will take vour place. Since this
is so, would it be right for you to accept the position, going along with
the corrupt systenn when sou must but trying to do as much good as you
can?

11. The Principle of Psychiatric Confidentiality

You are a psychiatrist and your patient has just confided to you
that he intends to kill a woman. You're inclined to dismis the threat as
 Some Moral Dilemmas

but you aren't sure. Should you report the threat to the police and
woman or should you remain silent as the principle of conidentiality
ween psychiatrist and patient demands? Should there be a law that
pels youto report such threats?

Two Drowning Men

There are two men on the verge of drowning who desperately need
your You can probably save one of them; the other will surely
drown. nOne of the men is vour father, a person you deeply love but
realize is of no particular importance to anyone but his own immediate
family. The other man, however, is a world renowned scientist who is on
the verge of fnding a cure for cancer. No one else, vou realize, is likely
to take his place for some time. Your initial impulse is to swim towards
your struggling fatlher, but seeing the other man and thinking of his im
portance, you hesitate. What should you do?

13. A Father's Right in a Pregnancy

Joan, an unmarried 18-year-old finds herself pregnant. Does she

have a moral obligation to inlorm the baby's father and allow him to
participate in the decision about whether she should have an abortion?
Vhat if Joan were married and wanted an abortion but kncw that her
husband would disapprove?

14. The Deathbed Promise

You and a friend have been shipwrecked on a deserted island. There

is only a limited amount of food availalble and it is extremely doubtful
that you can both survive on it until you are rescued. Your friend has
been injured and is more likely to succumb than you. He tells you that
you can have all ihc food, as long as you promise to see to it that his son
gets his share of the treasure the two of you have uncovered. Y'ou prom
ise. Your friend dies and you are reued. Intending to keep your prom
ise, you find your dead friend's on, his only living relative. You are dis
mayed when you discover the life he is leading and are convinced that
he would certainly waste his father's share of the treasure on the ex
travagances of which he is so fond. If your friend lid not kuow the life
his son was leading. you would feel absolutely no guilt in breaking your
promise, But you are convinced that he did know. You hesitate and then
decide that since your friend is dead. you can't hurt him by breaking
your promise. (You don't believe in an afterlife.) You decide that the
right thing to do in this situation is to break that promise. Feeling guilty
about your decision and even though you believe that reguil1 of
to be ira
tional, you decide that you should give your friend's share the treasure
to charity in his name. This is what you do. You continue, however, to

11 of 433 I A3
 THE NATURE OF MORAL REASONING

eel guilty about your action, and sometimes wonder whether you really
id right. But you keep telling yourself that you're being irrational and
hat your action was morally justified. Right?

5. The Promise or the Innocent Man

A friend of yours has confided to you that he has committed a
particular
an innoenterime
man and you have
has been promised
acused of your never to crime,
friend's tell. Dicovering that
you plead with
him to give himself up to the authorities. He refuses and reminds youof
your promise. What should vou do?

16. The Reluctant Voter

You are on your way home from work on a Presidential election

day. You were planning to vote, but you're rather tired and would like
very much to get home quickly, relax, and have a couple of drinks before
supper. Y'ou really don't want to spend the extra half hour or more that
it would ake you to get to the polling place, vote, and get home. You
think about it and convince yourself that you might as well go home.
After all, your vote certainly will not make a difference in this national
election. Since others may criticize you, you decide not to tell anyone
you didn't vote. The more you think about it, the more convinced you
become that it really is foolish tor a erson to vote when they know their
refusal to vote will not make a dillerence towards the outcome or to the
voting behavior of others. What, ifanything, is wrong with this sort of
moral reasoning?

17. The Soft-Hearted Professor

You are a professor plhiloophy. A student who is doing D work

comes to you jus belore the fnal and explains to you that he needs a C
in your das to be admited next semester to the business school to which
he hopes to transíer. He daims that he's been working hard in your das
but just doesn't seem to understand what is going on. You offer to help
him, but soon diMover that there isn't much vou can do short of giving
him the questions and answers to the final. He seems quite sincere, how
ever, and you would hate to have lhis admission rejected on the basis of
your grade. Vou're very tempted o give him the C and attempt to justify
this to yourelf by reflec ting that "a good busines adminisration major
cdoesn't hare to have any aptitude for philosophy." But then again, you
think, "It would be unfair to the other students." What should you do?