Moral Dilemmas

What would you do when faced with

a difficult moral choice?
 Hypothetical and Real Dilemmas
• In ethics, it is helpful to consider hypothetical
and real scenarios of moral dilemmas.
• A dilemma is a situation where there is no
clear “best choice” between two or more
alternatives.
• Dilemmas help us to focus our moral intuitions
and test our moral theories.
 Are there any real moral dilemmas?
There are a number of possible reasons for thinking
that moral dilemmas do not really exist:
1. You might think that the ideal moral theory
should solve all potential dilemmas.
2. You might be a moral nihilist, and so deny that
there is any morally correct choice.
3. You might be a relativist, and so think that
whatever option you prefer is the right option for
you.
 There are genuine moral dilemmas
only if…

• Some things are morally better than others.

• It is unclear which choice is the morally best
one.
Is this a moral dilemma? Why or why
not?
If morals are a matter of taste, then moral dilemmas are
no different than the choice between strawberry or
chocolate.

Given this, we can go one of the following directions:

1. Maintain that moral dilemmas amount to confusions
over personal preference, but insist that they are not
for this reason trivial.
2. Appeal to some principles of agreement about moral
preferences that go beyond the purely subjective
dilemma over strawberry or chocolate.
3. Give up on the idea that morals are a matter of
personal preference.
 The “Trolley Problem”
Imagine that you are an employee working for the train
company as a switch operator. One day you see a train
speeding down the track, its driver is in obvious
distress. You realize that the train has had a
malfunction and is unable to stop.
You look ahead of the train and see five workers working
on the track. If you allow the train to go ahead, it will
surely kill all five.
However, you could divert the train by switching tracks.
On the alternate track, there is one worker, working
alone.
If you switch the train, you cause the death of one
worker; if you do nothing, five will die. What will you
do?
 Sophie’s choice
• A classic, real-life example is provided by the
story of Sophie’s choice (based on a true story):

In this story, Sophie is interned at a Nazi

concentration camp. She has two young children.
One day, she is confronted by a Nazi soldier who
offers her the following choice: He says, “I am
going to shoot one or both of your children. You
tell me which one to shoot, or I will shoot them
both.” What do you do?
 Should you always tell the truth?

• A murderer at the door is looking for your

friend who is hiding in your house.

• Your co-worker is cheating on her time-sheet.

• You witness a parking-lot accident.

 Are there laws it is acceptable to
break?
• Underground railroad.
• A poor man stealing medicine for his dying
wife.
• Tax laws.
• Speed Limits.
• 21 year-old drinking age.
• Recreational drug use.
 Should you take this job?

You are offered a job that will require you to do

things that you find morally questionable.
– If you don’t take it, someone else will.
– Maybe you can work for good from the inside.
– With the money you can take care of your family
and even give back to charities.
 Sartre’s soldier’s dilemma
• Jean-Paul Sartre, in his Existentialism and Human Emotions,
tells the story of a young student of his during World War II
who was faced with a difficult dilemma.
– The young man’s father was not on good terms with his mother
and was inclined to be a German collaborator.
– The young man’s brother had been killed in the German
offensive and the young man wanted to avenge his death.
– His mother lived alone with him and was grief stricken by the
treachery of her husband and the death of her oldest son.
• The young man is faced with the following decision: do I
stay with my mother (to comfort and care for her) or go
fight in the war (to avenge the death of my brother and
fight on behalf of my nation).
 Sartre’s analysis
• Sartre reasons that there are no moral principles that can
ultimately guide these decisions. The dilemma exists
because of a genuine conflict in moral principles.
• It seems that the only way to determine the right choice is
to follow your values, preferences, or beliefs. But how do
you know what you value, prefer, or believe?
• Sartre says: “The only way to determine the value of this
affection is, precisely, to perform an act which confirms or
defines it. But, since I require this affection to justify my
act, I find myself caught in a vicious circle.” (27)
• Later on, he explains: “Man makes himself. He isn’t ready
made at the start. In choosing his ethics, he makes himself,
and force of circumstances is such that he cannot abstain
from choosing one.” (43)
Can you think of any moral dilemmas
you encounter in everyday life?
How do you resolve a moral dilemma?
• What sorts of duties, preferences, or values do you appeal
to?
• Is it always a matter of the consequences or results?
• Does it matter which choice is more virtuous? Is that always
the same thing as the one that produces the best
consequences?
• Are there any actions that have intrinsic value
– Actions with intrinsic value should be followed above others
that produce the same results.
– There may even be some actions that are either so intrinsically
good or so intrinsically bad that they should or should not be
done at all cost.
• As with Sartre, we might conclude that moral principles do
not justify the action, but the action justifies the principles.
 Metaethical questions:
• What is good? How do we determine which
kinds of actions are better than others?
• Are there any objective moral goods (i.e.,
things that are good in general)?
• Does the good derive from the result/goal, or
does it derive from the nature of the action?
• Should we look for our moral systems to
resolve moral dilemmas or are dilemmas a
necessary part of ethics?