WEEK 2

MORAL DILEMMAS

A dilemma is a situation where a person is forced to choose between two or more conflicting options, neither of which is
acceptable. As we can see, the key here is that the person has choices to make that will all have results she does not want.

For example, a town mayor faces a dilemma about how to protect and preserve a virgin forest and at the same time allow
miners and loggers for economic development in the town. It must be noted, however, that if a person is in a difficult
situation but is not forced to choose between two or more options, then that person is not in a dilemma. The least that we
can say is that that person is just experiencing a problematic or distressful situation. Thus, the most logical thing to do for
that person is to look for alternatives or solutions to address the problem.

When dilemmas involve human actions which have moral implications, they are called ethical or moral dilemmas.
It is when persons are forced to choose between two or more conflicting options, neither of which resolves the situation in
a morally acceptable manner.

Consider the following example:

Lindsay is a deeply religious person; hence, she considers killing humans absolutely wrong. Unfortunately, it is found out
that Lindsay is having an ectopic pregnancy. As is well known, an ectopic pregnancy is a type of pregnancy that occurs
outside the uterus, most commonly in the fallopian tubes. In other words, in ectopic pregnancy, the fetus does not develop
in the uterus. Now, if this happens, the development of the fetus will definitely endanger the mother. Thus, if Lindsay
continues with her pregnancy, then there is a big possibility that she will die. According to experts, the best way to save
Lindsay’s life is to abort the fetus, which necessarily implies killing the fetus. If we do not abort the fetus, then Lindsay, as
well as the fetus, will die.

In the above example of a moral dilemma, Lindsay is faced with two conflicting options, namely, either she resorts to
abortion, which will save her life but at the same time jeopardizes her moral integrity or does not resort to abortion but
endangers her life as well as the fetus. Indeed, Lindsay is faced with a huge moral dilemma.

According to Karen Allen, there are three conditions that must be present for situations to be considered moral dilemmas.
• First, the person or the agent of a moral action is obliged to make a decision about which course of action is best.
Here, the moral agent must choose the best option and act accordingly. In the case of the example of above, Lindsay
may opt to abort the fetus as the best course of action.
• Second, there must be different courses of action to choose from. Hence, as already pointed out above, there must
be two or more conflicting options to choose from for moral dilemmas to occur.
• And third, no matter what course of action is taken, some moral principles are always compromised. This means
that, according to Allen, there is no perfect solution to the problem. And for this reason, according to Benjiemen
Labastin, in moral dilemmas, the moral agent “seems fated to commit something wrong which implies that she is
bound to morally fail because in one way or another she will fail to do something which she ought to do. In other
words, by choosing one of the possible moral requirements, the person also fails on others.”

3 LEVELS OF MORAL DILEMMAS:

a. Individual Moral Dilemma - those experienced and resolved on the personal level.
Example: Sartre, a French philosopher, tells of a student whose brother had been killed in the German offensive of 1940.
The student wanted to avenge his brother and to fight forces that he regarded as evil. But the student’s mother was living
with him, and he was her one consolation in life. The student believed that he had conflicting obligations. Sartre describes
him as being torn between two kinds of morality: one of limited scope but certain efficacy, personal devotion to his mother;
the other of much wider scope but uncertain efficacy, attempting to contribute to the defeat of an unjust aggressor.
- If someone makes conflicting promises, he faces a moral conflict.
- When an individual has to choose between the life of a child who is about to be delivered and the child’s mother, he faces
an ethical dilemma.

b. Organizational Moral Dilemmas - ethical cases encountered and resolved by social organizations. This category
includes moral dilemmas in business, medical field, and public sector.
WEEK 2

For example, a hospital that believes that human life should not be deliberately shortened and that unpreventable pain should
not be tolerated encounters a conflict in resolving whether to withdraw life support from a dying patient. This is a common
moral dilemma faced by healthcare organizations and medical institutions.

Moral dilemmas also arise in professional work. Administrative bodies in business are confronted with situations in which
several courses of action are possible but none of them provide a totally successful outcome to those affected by the decision
or actions taken. These moral dilemmas in business involve issues about corporate practices, policies, business behaviors,
and the conducts and relationships of individuals in the organizations. Other business-related dilemmas pertain to the social
responsibility of businesses, employee rights, harassment, labor unions, misleading advertising, job discrimination, and
whistle blowing.

On the part of public sector, government leaders and employees have a moral duty to act in a manner that is fair and unbiased.
They should be loyal to the public and ought to put public interest before personal gain, and fulfill duties of competency,
integrity, accountability, and transparency. Having said that, public officials nonetheless may encounter foreseeable moral
dilemmas in fulfilling these ideals. So ethical or moral dilemmas which arise include the following examples:
-whether or not to favor family, friends, or campaign contributors over other constituents;
-favoring the agenda of one’s political party over a policy one believes to be good for the community;
– dealing with conflicting public duties inherent in serving both as a council member and as a member of an agency or
commission;
– resigning from organizations in which membership may give rise to future conflicts;
– becoming whistle blower even if it means potentially derailing a policy objective one is pursuing; and,
– accepting gifts if it is legally permitted but creates the appearance of impropriety.

c. Structural Moral Dilemmas - pertain to cases involving network of institutions and operative theoretical paradigms.
They are larger in scope than organizational dilemmas as they usually encompass multi-sectoral institutions and
organizations.

An example is the prices of medicine in the Philippines which are higher compared to other countries in Asia and in countries
of similar economic status. Factors affecting medicine prices include the cost of research, presence of competition in the
market, government regulations, and patent protection. The institutions concerned may want to lower the costs of medicine,
thereby benefiting the Filipino public, but such a move may ruin the interests or legal rights of the involved researchers,
inventors or discoverers, and pharmaceutical companies which own the patent of the medicines or healthcare technologies.

An example of dilemma which is also structural in nature is that of Universal Health Care (UHC). Locally applied, it is
called “Kalusugan Pangkalahatan” (KP). It is the provision to every Filipino of the highest possible quality of health care
that is accessible, efficient, equitably distributed, adequately funded, fairly financed, and appropriately used by an informed
and empowered public. “Kalusugan Pangkalahatan” (KP), as a government mandate, aims to ensure that every Filipino shall
receive affordable and quality health benefits by (ideally) providing adequate resources – health human resources, health
facilities, and health financing. Nonetheless, health financing is first and foremost a big issue here. Government could set
aside bigger budget for health for the implementation of this provision. But then, this would mean cutting down allocations
on other sectors (such as education or public works.).

FREEDOM AS FOUNDATION FOR MORAL ACTS

There are Eastern and Western philosophers who viewed that freedom is followed by responsibility.
Freedom – power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint
- connotes no ties, no hindrance, no blocks.
- There is no absolute freedom. In reality, freedom cannot be absolute; no one can be completely free.
Examples of Freedom: Freedom to be alive; Freedom of speech; Freedom to express oneself; Freedom to press; Freedom
to choose one's state in life; Freedom to talking each other; Freedom of religion; Freedom from bondage and slavery
Responsibility – connotes doing something, not because you want to but because it is expected of you.
WEEK 2

Most philosophers hold that unlike animals, human beings possess some traits that make it possible for them to be moral:

A. Only human beings are rational, autonomous, and self-conscious.

A rational person is someone who is sensible and is able to make decisions based on intelligent thinking. Free will
describes our capacity to make choices that are genuinely our own. With free will comes moral responsibility – our
ownership of our good and bad deeds.
Autonomy – self-governed; Individual has an autonomous right to be happy in their own way.
Self-conscious – For instance, in order to attain the kind of dignity and self-respect that human beings have, a being must
be able to conceive of itself as one among many, and must be able to consciously select his actions rather than be led by
blind instinct.

B. Only human beings can act morally or immorally. Strictly speaking, an animal which devours another animal cannot be
said to be immoral. In the same manner, no matter how good an animal’s action seems to be, it cannot be technically said
to be moral. Only human beings can act morally or immorally.

This is important in Ethics because only beings that can act morally can be required to sacrifice their interests for the sake
of others. Not able to truly act morally, animals could not really sacrifice their own good for the sake of others, but would
even pursue their good at the expense of others.

C. Only human beings are part of the moral community. The so-called moral community refers to terms of the essential
social relations that exists between or among beings. Distinctively, only human beings can possess or practice values such
as love, honor, social relationships, forgiveness, compassion, and altruism. Moreover, only human beings can communicate
with each other in truly meaningful ways, can engage in economic, political, and familial relationships with each other, and
can also form deep personal relationships with each other. These kinds of relationships require the members of such
relationships to extend real concern to other members of these relationships in order for the relationships to continue.
Another thing human beings have that no animal has the ability to participate in a collective cognition. That is, we, as
individuals, are able to draw on the collective knowledge of humanity in a way no animal can. Freedom as a Foundation of
Morality As explained above, one of the reasons animals cannot be truly ethical is that they are not really autonomous or
free.

Basically, morality is a question of choice. Morality, practically, is choosing ethical codes, values, or standards to guide us
in our daily lives. Philosophically, choosing is impossible without freedom. Morality requires and allows choice, which
means the right to choose even differently from our fellows. In their daily lives, people make the choice to give to
charities, donate time and money to schools, mentor and children, open businesses, or protest against animal cruelty.
Everyone who wishes to function morally or rationally in a society has to make choices virtually every minute of the day.
Practically, the sum of our choices can be said to define our specific ‘morality.’

Why freedom become the foundation of moral acts?

Because, we people have its own freedom, and there are no limits onto it, and that is the main reason why freedom is
based on the moral act, is to just to give a limit to the people, limit to know what would to the right or wrong decision to
be made.

REFERENCES: Bulaong, Oscar G.et al 2018 Ethics Foundations of Moral Valuation. Rex Bookstore Inc. Nicanor Reyes St. Recto Ave. Manila,
Philippines De Guzman, J.M. et al 2017 Principles of Ethical Behavior in Modern Society. Mutya Publishing House Inc. Potrero, Malabon Manebog,
J.DG. Ethics: A primer Appendix A Plato on Justice http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic Gallinero, Winston B. et al 2018 Ethics. Mutya Publishing
House Inc. Pateros Malabon City Pasco, Marc Oliver D. et al 2018. Ethics. C&E Publishing Inc. Quezon City, Philippines
https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/agusan-national-high-school/intermediate-accounting/moral-dilemma-lecture-notes/24257435
https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/technological-institute-of-the-philippines/ethics/module-3-freedom-as-foundation-for-moral-acts/19199286