A634.1.5.RB_MaceRoyce
How shall we live, as individuals in the face of decisions about right versus wrong? How shall we handle those occasions when none of the choices are attractive? Consider the following ethical dilemma and create a reflection blog regarding what you would do when having to make a choice in each train scenario. Justify your position and create a synopsis of your position and the implications.
Scenario one: A train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing. You are the switchperson. By throwing the switch, you can put the train on a side track where one child is standing. Will you throw the switch?
Scenario two: Same as scenario one except you are standing next to an elderly man. If you push him in front of the train it will stop the train and all the children will be saved.
Will you push him?
Scenario three: Same as scenario one except the one child on the side track is your child. Will you throw the switch to save the five children?
While I would hope to have more information in this scenario, the lack of information will keep my answer simple. For example, if I knew that the group of five children could be saved and the one child could not, I would more than likely keep the train going towards the five children. A logical decision would come into play. However, that is not what this scenario is asking. It is forcing the "switchperson" to make an ethical decision based on their own set of ethics and determine who lives and who dies.
In order to avoid hypocrisy and stay true to my own personal set of ethics, I feel that my answer will be the same in every scenario. Fate has decided to put that train on its path (its original path). Any person is its way happens to be a bi-product of a fateful occurrence. It is not up to me whether five lives are more important than one or vice versa. Whether an elderly man should be killed just because of his age. If the decision is made to let the sole child die, is it possible that that one child could have grown up to cure cancer? Surely, these are all answers that fate will decide with time, for better or for worse, For the utilitarian, the decision to maximize the saving of lives would be the best ethical option, but I have chosen not to follow this way of thinking based on the scenario's facts and my own moral compass.
With such a lack of known variables to the scenario, my own personal ethics tell me to let fate decide what will occur. Based on personal ethics alone,coupled with the given scenario, the train will continue on its designated path. In assessing my own decision-making as it relates to this scenario, I can also see how it could be challenged. Why not save five versus the one child? Why not let the elderly man die who has already had the opportunity to live life? Why not save your own child if you have the opportunity to?
It is for these reasons that I choose the same option every time based on my own ethics which in addition to relying on fate, also requires consistency should details or calculated alternatives not be presented. As with the class readings, my learned ethics have determined what course of action to take in each scenario. Still, if I were to have children of my own, would my own learned ethics change any of my answers (specifically the third)? Having no children of my own and not understanding what it's like to have a child reiterates the theory of learned ethics as a transformative process via Brennan (n.d.) where our own ethics are learned over the course of our adolescent and adult lives.
References
Scenario one: A train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing. You are the switchperson. By throwing the switch, you can put the train on a side track where one child is standing. Will you throw the switch?
Scenario two: Same as scenario one except you are standing next to an elderly man. If you push him in front of the train it will stop the train and all the children will be saved.
Will you push him?
Scenario three: Same as scenario one except the one child on the side track is your child. Will you throw the switch to save the five children?
While I would hope to have more information in this scenario, the lack of information will keep my answer simple. For example, if I knew that the group of five children could be saved and the one child could not, I would more than likely keep the train going towards the five children. A logical decision would come into play. However, that is not what this scenario is asking. It is forcing the "switchperson" to make an ethical decision based on their own set of ethics and determine who lives and who dies.
In order to avoid hypocrisy and stay true to my own personal set of ethics, I feel that my answer will be the same in every scenario. Fate has decided to put that train on its path (its original path). Any person is its way happens to be a bi-product of a fateful occurrence. It is not up to me whether five lives are more important than one or vice versa. Whether an elderly man should be killed just because of his age. If the decision is made to let the sole child die, is it possible that that one child could have grown up to cure cancer? Surely, these are all answers that fate will decide with time, for better or for worse, For the utilitarian, the decision to maximize the saving of lives would be the best ethical option, but I have chosen not to follow this way of thinking based on the scenario's facts and my own moral compass.
With such a lack of known variables to the scenario, my own personal ethics tell me to let fate decide what will occur. Based on personal ethics alone,coupled with the given scenario, the train will continue on its designated path. In assessing my own decision-making as it relates to this scenario, I can also see how it could be challenged. Why not save five versus the one child? Why not let the elderly man die who has already had the opportunity to live life? Why not save your own child if you have the opportunity to?
It is for these reasons that I choose the same option every time based on my own ethics which in addition to relying on fate, also requires consistency should details or calculated alternatives not be presented. As with the class readings, my learned ethics have determined what course of action to take in each scenario. Still, if I were to have children of my own, would my own learned ethics change any of my answers (specifically the third)? Having no children of my own and not understanding what it's like to have a child reiterates the theory of learned ethics as a transformative process via Brennan (n.d.) where our own ethics are learned over the course of our adolescent and adult lives.
References
Brennan, M. (n.d.) Can Ethics be Taught and Learned? The Answer is in You! Retrieved from
Comments
Post a Comment