4. Support your conclusions with evidence and specific examples from the textbook, including a minimum of one theory of ethics to defend your stance. 5. Your reflection must be 1-2 pages in length and follow APA formatting and citation guidelines as appropriate, making sure to cite at least two sources.
Ethics, a branch of philosophy, deals with questions of what is morally right or wrong. It explores the concepts of good and bad, virtue and vice, and the principles that guide human behavior. In the realm of ethics, there are various theories proposed by philosophers to understand and evaluate moral actions. In this paper, I will reflect on the ethical dilemma presented in the textbook and offer my perspective on the matter based on the utilitarian ethical theory.
The assigned reading titled “Ethical Dilemmas: The Trolley Problem” delves into a common ethical dilemma known as the trolley problem. The scenario proposes a hypothetical situation in which a runaway trolley is heading towards five individuals tied to the track. However, you have the option to divert the trolley to an alternative track where it would only hit one person instead. The dilemma lies in whether it is morally justifiable to sacrifice one life to save five.
As I contemplate this ethical dilemma, it becomes clear to me that utilitarianism provides a robust framework for analyzing and resolving such moral quandaries. Utilitarianism, as advocated by philosophers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, promotes the idea of maximizing overall happiness or pleasure in a given situation. According to this theory, the morally right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of overall happiness or utility for the majority.
In the context of the trolley problem, applying utilitarianism would entail diverting the trolley to the track with one person in order to save five lives. By doing so, the total happiness or well-being of the affected individuals would be maximized. The five people who would have otherwise faced certain death would be able to continue living their lives, potentially contributing to the welfare and happiness of themselves and those around them.
Moreover, utilitarianism takes into account the principle of impartiality – the idea that all individuals’ interests are equally important and should be considered when making moral decisions. In the case of the trolley problem, favoring the one person over the five would be biased and inconsistent with this principle. By treating all lives equally and prioritizing the overall happiness of the majority, utilitarianism offers a compelling solution to this ethical dilemma.
The textbook provides a powerful example of utilitarian reasoning in action. It describes a real-life incident involving Chesley Sullenberger, the pilot famously known for landing a plane on the Hudson River, saving the lives of all on board. Sullenberger’s decision to land the plane on the river, instead of attempting to reach a nearby airport, illustrates the utilitarian principle of maximizing overall happiness. By choosing to land on the river, Sullenberger minimized the potential loss of life and maximized the chances of survival for everyone on board.
Another example that supports my perspective can be found in the work of Peter Singer, a prominent utilitarian philosopher. Singer argues for the moral obligation to prevent suffering and promote the welfare of all sentient beings, including non-human animals. He maintains that ethical decisions should be based on the consequences they have on the overall well-being of individuals. This aligns with the utilitarian notion of maximizing happiness and utility.
In conclusion, the utilitarian ethical theory provides a compelling lens through which to analyze and resolve ethical dilemmas. Applying utilitarianism to the trolley problem, it becomes evident that diverting the trolley to the track with one person is the morally right course of action. By prioritizing the overall happiness and well-being of the majority, this decision maximizes the utility and upholds the principle of impartiality. The real-life examples discussed in the textbook, along with the insights of philosopher Peter Singer, further reinforce the applicability and validity of utilitarianism in ethical decision-making.