Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Meursalt moral ambiguity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Meursalt moral ambiguity
When told to face a morally indifferent decision between personal gain and the preservation of life, most would say that they would choose anything against personal gain. In reality, the situation is grey. It depends on the decisions and the type of dilemma you are faced with rather than the simple black and white point of view. As an example, the story arc for Anakin Skywalker in the Star Wars Prequels. He was faced with a complex decision between preserving the Jedi lifestyle and the temptation of the Dark Side. With a childhood of slavery, Anakin had to look out for himself and his mother, tired of being controlled by the lifestyle in his home planet of Tatooine, Anakin left his mother to pursue becoming a Jedi, therefore putting personal
Thus, Makau moved to Makarfi and started his life successfully because he found a bag of silver on the way to Makarfi. When he asked his family to reunite with him, Umar’s mother went back to visit her family side home and let Umar stay with a neighbor wife named Amina. I think he wants to show the reality of that time and allow people to see the real side of the story. Slaves are people, but they are treated as property.
Pennington explained how it angered him when people used the excuse of “kind masters” or “well fed and well-clothed slaves” as a form of justification for slavery. This relates to paternalism, the notion that masters took responsibility for their “dependents” (women, children, and, slaves). Owners claimed that they considered slaves “part of the family” and provided them with religious instruction, food, housing, medical care, care in old age, etc.. However, this notion of “paternalism” can be misleading, as even the “mildest form of slavery” still included separation of families, starvation, physical punishment or whipping if their slaves defied them, nakedness, etc. According to Pennington, even “good” owners were not masters of the slave system; the slave system was a master of them (p.374). They claimed to “love” their slaves, yet they were always willing to sell them for a certain price. Most importantly, due to the chattel principle, even if one had a “good” owner, he could easily be moved and sold to a bad owner. The chattel principle became one of the main critiques of slavery by northern abolitionists and motivated them to decimate the pro-slavery
Heroes are often perceived as characters who leap great distances in a single bound. However, they actually have three distinct stages where they develop into the character we grow to love. In George Lucas` “StarWars IV: A New Hope.” Luke Skywalker is a quintessence of of an archetypal hero because he goes through initiation stage through distinct phases of separation, transformation and the return stage. Luke Skywalker begins his journey as farmer boy on a remote planet and becomes the hero of the galaxy. However, this process the not happen quickly. Rather, it is a difficult journey where is is faced with multiple tests and obstacles and pushes his endurance to the limit.
it hard to choose an alternative. “When resolving moral dilemmas one is presented with two or
...family structure. The acquired slave system demanded that the slave masters impose physiological and psychological maintenance to control slaves. One way of upholding the social order was to strip slaves of their own right to know who they were and where they came from. Ultimately, preventing slaves from ever gaining a sense of self- fulfillment or the pursuit of happiness. Slavery as an institution broke all familial bonds, induced extreme suffering and emphasized inhumanness at the core. Slavery took an emotional toll on all involved and abolishing it benefited the entire American society.
This case is a very difficult one because it’s not just involving you but it is involving the people you love dearest. You are basically being given only two choices and that is to save your family or to watch them die. This essay will discuss the different take utilitarian’s have on the decision and the outlook deontologists have
How can one choose either stance when both would contradict their morals? This gray area is what many people find themselves falling into.
Utilitarianism is an ethical system that states that one should make moral choices based on which moral option brings the most pleasure and for the most people. This system is a consequentialist one, meaning that means or actions do not matter; only the consequences or results of one’s actions determine if the choice made was morally right or wrong. Actions and decisions can only be evaluated by the results they produce. If someone’s actions result in more pain than pleasure, then that action is determined to be a morally wrong one; if an action results in the most pleasure for the most people, then it is considered morally good. This system can be hard to apply when evaluating and weighing moral options since it is a consequentialist system;
Examining the case with the Utilitarian mindset, we consider the overall positivity of the action vs the positivity of the alternative. In this case, what is the measure
An ethical dilemma is only examined in a situation which has the following conditions; the first condition takes place in a situation, when an individual has to make a decision on which course of action is best. The second condition is there must be more than one course of action to choose from. The third action is no matter what course of action is taken, certain ethical principles are conceded. In other terms, there is no perfect result. When defining what forms an ethical dilemma, it is important to make a division between ethics, morals, values, laws and policies.
Two ideologies that exist in ethics and apply to decision-making are utilitarian and deontological viewpoints. Ethical theories provide a systematic approach to decision-making toward the applications of standard principles. “In utilitarian ethics, outcomes justify the means or ways to achieve it” (Mandal, Ponnambath, & Parija, 2016, p. 5). Decisions made considering utility are based benefitting the greatest number of people. In utilitarianism, outcomes determine the moral nature of interventions. Some people are to experience harm, but the overall outcome is good for most individuals. Applying utilitarianism personally or professionally seems relevant when considering its ideology maximizes happiness and minimizes suffering. Utilitarianism
A utilitarian approach to moral reasoning is also one where different options are weighed, although utilitarians are interested in minimising harm and maximising benefit. Importantly, utilitarians hold a universal perspective when reasoning, where they consider the impact upon all those who may be affected, who have interests of their own (Grace & Cohen 2013: 14-15).
Someone you love very much is dying from an illness. This person might be your significant other, a parent, a child, or maybe a close friend. Their only saving grace is a drug discovered and owned by a local pharmacist. There’s just one problem: you cannot afford the drug and must make a life or death decision on what to do next. This situation is known as the Heinz Dilemma, and most of the subtopics of this chapter can all be tied back to this core issue. Do you steal the drug and save a life, or follow the law and let someone you love die? Also discussed in this chapter is how moral development affects choice-making, the different stages of moral development, and how morality develops.
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
In life we go through many ethical dilemmas, some easier to answer than others. No matter what ethical dilemma you meet, to make that decision we all have a process that we go through. When I am met with an ethical dilemma first I would map out my choices, consider my morals and if any of the choices violate my morals and how severe, then list to myself the pros and cons for the results of each decision on my behalf and the person(s) that are involved with my decision. I will then consider if I was on the other side of the decision and think what I would have wanted the person to decide on and then put a mindset of the person to think what they might have wanted for me to decide on and finally I will make my decision.