Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
I would have been thinking about social norms and categorical imperatives in Kohlberg's system -- or about the social value of self-sacrifice in Gilligan's.
Instead I made a moral choice that reflects moral maturity: a level of caring that Gilligan would define as postconventional. Whether consciously or not, I was determined to preserve the dignity and promote the well-being of both my friends. I took myself out of the picture. I knew that I was dealing with sensitive emotional issues and bonds of friendship that could be severed with one wrong word. Whether or not Julie and John were having problems was none of my business. I did not pry; I did not ask John what his possible role in Julie's behavior was either.
Kohlberg would claim that I had internalized a set of agreed-upon social values and my actions reflected the norms that underwrite morality in our culture. I would have reasoned that Julie and John each had a right to the Truth and that I was put in...
In this situation, Gilligan's model more accurately reflects my decision to gently confront Julie rather than ignore John's request, ask Julie too bold of a question, or do anything else that might hurt Julie or John. I was not thinking about the value of their relationship, either. Knowing that not all relationships are meant to work out in the long run, I was not acting from a conventional moral position that valued relationship preservation over the happiness of my friends. Similarly, I felt that no matter what the outcome of the situation, I would be doing whatever I could to care for my friends. If it meant losing one or both of them, at least I would have been acting on the higher moral principles that transcend selfishness. Honoring Julie and John's value as human beings, I acted with postconventional morality.
Seeing how the Prime Directive should no longer apply, Picard was free to do whatever was necessary in order to save his crewman. However, the advanced technology employed by the aliens forced Picard to argue for the life of Wesley Crusher. His argument centers around the idea that this conflict is over whether or not moral universalism, or moral relativism would apply in the case of Wesley Crusher. Picard argues
He is not depriving the pharmacist of his livelihood. He is not depriving another sick individual from having access to the same medication. Harvey only risks getting caught stealing and even if he were caught would be unlikely to spend any time in jail given the extenuating circumstances. Therefore, Harvey should steal the medication from a utilitarian perspective. Although a duty-based system of ethics would propose that the immorality of
She paid good money for tuition and didn't take advantage of her opportunities to learn. She also lost out on increasing her self-esteem in a natural way by rising to meet challenges and doing her best. Instead of feeling proud, she felt guilty. If she confesses to her school, she will probably be kicked out and it will be on her record forever. She is not likely to do
students who planned to cheat on their schoolwork, or have cheated, especially in high school. To me, this meets the criteria for a moral dilemma, in particular in instances where I have had the opportunity to join in on this. Now, one would think that this maybe is not a moral issue because it is clearly against the rules, but the reality is that true moral dilemmas, where no
Any objective set of moral criteria must include: (1) the obligation not to cause pain unnecessarily to another; (2) the consideration of fetal survivability; and (3) recognition that a fetus undoubtedly becomes a living person at some point prior to full-term birth. On the other hand, even with the benefit of modern medical technology, there may be no way of identifying precisely at what point of gestation those moral
Moral and Medical Dilemma As the progression of medical technology has expanded humanity's ability to heal one another directly -- through the process of organ transplants, blood transfusions, and bone marrow exchanges -- several ethical dilemmas have surfaced which impact physicians, patients, and politicians alike. An individual's voluntary decision to donate his or her organs in the event of an unexpected death, and the government's methods for devising an equitable system