Ethical Dilemma: Trolley Problem.
ANSWER
The classic trolley problem presents a moral dilemma that has been the subject of philosophical debate for many years. Different moral philosophies can offer varying perspectives on how to approach this situation.
- Utilitarianism: Utilitarianism is a consequentialist ethical theory that evaluates actions based on their outcomes. From a utilitarian perspective, the morally right action would be to flip the switch and redirect the trolley toward the one person. This decision is justified because it maximizes overall happiness by saving five lives at the expense of one.
- Duty-Based Ethics (e.g., Kantianism): Duty-based ethics emphasize principles and duties over consequences. According to Kantian ethics, it would be wrong to intentionally harm an innocent person, regardless of the potential consequences. Therefore, flipping the switch to divert the trolley toward the one person would be morally impermissible, as it involves using the one person as a means to an end.
- Virtue Ethics: Virtue ethics focus on the character of the person making the decision. A virtuous person would weigh the situation carefully and may act in accordance with courage, compassion, and wisdom. The decision could vary based on the individual’s virtues, but it might lean towards not actively causing harm.
Regarding ethical, moral, and legal obligations:
- Ethical Obligations: Ethically, the choice would depend on the individual’s personal values and ethical framework. Some may prioritize the greater good (utilitarianism), while others may prioritize respecting individual rights (duty-based ethics) or demonstrating virtues.
- Moral Obligations: Moral obligations can vary among individuals. Some may feel a moral duty to save as many lives as possible (utilitarian perspective), while others may feel a moral duty not to intentionally harm anyone (duty-based ethics).
- Legal Obligations: From a legal standpoint, intentionally diverting the trolley toward one person could potentially result in legal consequences, as it involves intentionally causing harm. However, laws may vary, and legal defenses like necessity or self-defense might be applicable in some jurisdictions.
Moral relativism is the view that moral truths are relative to individuals or cultures and that there are no absolute moral standards. While it’s essential to recognize cultural and individual differences in moral beliefs, there are potential dangers in claiming that nothing is absolutely right or wrong:
- Lack of Moral Accountability: Without some shared moral framework or absolute standards, it becomes challenging to hold individuals or societies accountable for morally reprehensible actions.
- Moral Indifference: Moral relativism can lead to a sense of moral indifference, where individuals may not feel compelled to take a stance against actions they would otherwise consider wrong.
- Inability to Address Moral Conflicts: In situations like the trolley problem, moral relativism can make it difficult to resolve conflicts when different individuals or cultures have conflicting moral beliefs.
In conclusion, the trolley problem highlights the complexity of moral decision-making and the role of different ethical philosophies in guiding our choices. It also underscores the importance of considering ethical, moral, and legal obligations in making difficult decisions while recognizing the potential pitfalls of moral relativism.
QUESTION
Description
In the classic trolley problem, you are faced with a moral dilemma. Imagine that a trolley is barreling down the tracks uncontrollably. It is headed directly towards a crew of five workers and will undoubtedly crash into them. You realize you are standing by a switch that could push the trolley onto a different track, but on that track is one person working. Do you flip the switch to save five workers at the expense of one? In answering the question and deciding what you would do, consider:
Different moral philosophies (utilitarianism, duty-based, virtue, etc.) and how each would factor into your decision.
Also discuss your ethical, moral, and legal obligations and how they may differ as well as the consequences of your decision from each perspective.
- Be sure to include a discussion of moral relativism and the potential dangers of claiming nothing is absolutely right or wrong.
Fill in the order form and submit all your files, including instructions, rubrics, and other information given to you by your instructor.
Once you complete filling the forms, complete your payment. We will get the order and assign it to a writer.
When your order is completed, it’s assigned to an editor for approval. The editor approves the order.
Once approved, we will upload the order to your account for you to download. You can rate your writer or give your customer review.
