20 Oct 2012
Ethical dilemma As is known to us, the moral dilemma in the usual case refers to the two answers, which you are likely to decide on the case, you need to make a difficult choice; usually this option is to focus on the choice between the result and process, which is more important at all. In our normal lives, there are a lot of issues which we need to adopt an different attitude to face, even should do, however sometimes, we are unable to determine, especially in the areas of morality, the choice is really difficult for itself to judge right or wrong, on the hand, you can say these two options are right if both of them are beneficial to people in different situations, on the other hand it can also be said that both of the two options are wrong because the choice we made will make people feel confused, and moral tools of human behavior, and so had to say it a little ironic feeling. Also morality is a social ideology, after many years living out of the correct value orientation. Sometimes people will be confused, I think this confusion is mainly caused by two aspects, one is process-oriented, and the other is a results-oriented. Let me illustrate: The first case I want to tell is as follows. A train was fast moving, the driver in the cab of the train was drinking a leisurely cup of coffee, at this moment, he suddenly found that five people were working on the front of the train, but the safety alarms didn't work, he forced brakes, but the brakes did not work either, a high-speed train was closing to the five people, but the five didn't know what would happen to them. At this time the driver found a fork in front of train, unfortunately a person standing on the fork of the road. Train was still running at a high speed, is it heading to the five people as usual? Or the one person was killed in the fork steering fork? Choose between five people or only one person, if you are the driver, which one do you choose? For this particular scene, I think most of the people will choose the answer which killed that one person instead of five , that is turned to the fork in the road, after all the amount of five person are digger than one person, the five person were survive, in the result, one person become the finally victim in this accident, although the hapless person did not know why he become the unlucky one, but if the driver do not choose turn to the other way, what will happen is that he use the expense of five human lives to save a human life, apparently, the five person survive is correct. This only concerned with the ethical principles of the results, and I called consequentialism, after all, five human lives are greater than a human life. The second case changes to another scene, but they are very similar. A train at a high speed, at the beginning is exactly the same, but this time, the road doesn't have a fork, but still have five person in front of the train, at this time, if you are not the driver of the train, you're just a passer who stand in the side of the road, a very fat man is next to you, if you push the fat man onto the road, his weight can make the train stop, in the result the fat person will die. In the meanwhile, you need to make a decision immediately, what will you do? Push the fat man in front of the train to make it stop although he will lose his life, or turn a blind eye to the train crashed on the five people? If we use the first scene concluded, our choice is certainly to push the fat guy, the expense of a human life, it can save that five human lives, so the result is same, but we imagine this fat man is your best friend, are you still choose to push him to the road? The same result is to sacrifice one person and...