Heinz Dilemma Case Study

709 Words2 Pages

Life threatening situations can be some of the most difficult situations that one can go through. During these types of situations moral lines can be blurred in such ways that what one may think is right for that situation is not actually a moral solution that one should do. In the case of the Heinz dilemma what is verses what isn’t moral is a hard decision to make. In the case of Heinz I feel personally that there were two wrong-doings that were done in order that one right-doing could be achieved. The shop owner was in the wrong for over pricing a drug and refusing to help Mr. Heinz ailing wife, but at the same time Mr. Heinz was in the wrong for stealing from the drug dealer. At the same time he was only forced into that situation due to …show more content…

The child probably thought that stealing the medicine and the food was justified because his mother needed the help and he needed his mother (Crandell, T.L.,Crandell, C.H., Vander Zanden, J.W. (2012)). Kulburg would say that it does not matter the moral reasoning behind the action but instead that there is a universal morality and one would not say that because the boy had good intentions for stealing verses a common thief who steals just to steal because universally the action of stealing is a morally wrong thing to do that cannot be justified (Crandell, T.L.,Crandell, C.H., Vander Zanden, J.W. (2012)). Piaget would look more that the child would think that his action was morally justified because he was raised in a way that he needed to help his mother in any way possible no matter what he had to do. This child was under the impression that helping his mother was a moral action and therefore stealing to help her would be morally justified in his case (Crandell, T.L.,Crandell, C.H., Vander Zanden, J.W. (2012)). In the case of morality what is moral verses what is immoral is a very hard study, and to know the right answer can be especially hard in the country that we live

Open Document