Ethical dilemmas thread

[Lark]

I dont know if I posted this before, I'm almost certain I did but I couldnt find it when I performed a couple of searches, but there's a game I've seen played on a couple of online discussion forums I've visited in which someone posts an ethical dilemma, you provide an answer and then you post a dilemma yourself to keep the thread going. It can be as simple/straight forward or complex as you like, that's either the dilemma or your response or both.

I really like to consider questions of ethics so I really like these sorts of things, although I'd like to keep the possibilities of it descending into ideologically motivated polemics to a minimum and I'll be quietly judging the hell out of everyone as I'm a Judgey McJudger type and totally comfortable with that, I'm not engaging in any sort of conniving or devious games though, so dont anyone get all wound like believing this thread is some action by a global illuminati or anything.

Anyway, I'll kick things off with the first dilemma then:

You are in a que for coffee and its a long que, everyone is in a hurry, when you go to counter to collect your coffee there's a lot of people milling around, there's no one you know and presume you dont know any of the baristas either, however, you notice a wallet left on the counter, there's a number of cards in it, folding money and photos but not anything with phone numbers or addresses which would readily identify the owner, what do you do?

 

[xXxXx_wEltschmErz_xXxXx]

I ignore the wallet. There are likely people who better know what to do with it around and I'd prefer not to get involved even if it means the wallet might get into the "wrong" hands.

You are unfortunately very sick and death is certain. While alone in your bed, a mysterious person appears out of nowhere and presents you with two opportunities. You can survive by either possessing a random human or a mighty mountain gorilla, or you can simply decline. You are given no further information and the choice must be made on the spot. What do you choose?

 

[Magic Poriferan]

You are in a que for coffee and its a long que, everyone is in a hurry, when you go to counter to collect your coffee there's a lot of people milling around, there's no one you know and presume you dont know any of the baristas either, however, you notice a wallet left on the counter, there's a number of cards in it, folding money and photos but not anything with phone numbers or addresses which would readily identify the owner, what do you do?

Knowing myself, I'd presumably do absolutely nothing about it because I am averse to interacting with crowds.

But I think the morally correct answer would be to ask the person working the counter who's wallet it is, and if they have no ideas, ask the room out loud if anyone left their wallet.

You are unfortunately very sick and death is certain. While alone in your bed, a mysterious person appears out of nowhere and presents you with two opportunities. You can survive by either possessing a random human or a mighty mountain gorilla, or you can simply decline. You are given no further information and the choice must be made on the spot. What do you choose?

This is actually very difficult. I really don't want to die and this might even be a means of living in perpetuity, not just avoiding one death. But both the other options sound really shitty for different reasons. I admit, there is essentially no ethical reason for the difficulty of my choice, every aspect of the dilemma is selfish. I guess I feel like I should take possession of a random human, as complicated as that will be.

 

[The Cat]

[MENTION=7280]Lark[/MENTION] What Wallet?
[MENTION=36288]Pasta[/MENTION] Why not, I'll posses a random human, let's roll the dice.

I'm gonna take a few moments to think of one...

 

[ugghh]

I'd turn the wallet in to the police. I'm not starving, and I know how much it sucks to lose your stuff.

I'd decline possessing either the human or the mountain gorilla, tbh. I'll take my chances with a standard model rebirth, lol

Hm, how about the trolley problem? I'm sure you know this one: There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person tied up on the side track. You have two options:

1. Do nothing, and the trolley kills the five people on the main track.
2. Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person.
Which is the most ethical choice, and why?

 

[Typh0n]

Lark: I'd probably leave the wallet where it is. Considering how important it is to the person who lost it, they'll come back for it. Drawing someone else's attention to the wallet could be problematic, though an alternative could be telling the bar's owner/manager/whoever is responsible. Since they wallet normally would contain ID/drivers license of the owner, they couldn't claim it as their own, unless it was (IDs have a photograph).

Pasta: I would probably decline. I don't believe possessing someone, or a gorilla even, is ethical because I would be displacing their soul.

Ugghh: It wouldn't matter what I do. Ultimately, I am not a utilitarian, so I don't believe the lives of more people are worth more than that of one person - either choice is equally ethical/unethical.

I'll think of something later.

 

[Lark]

Guys, you dont need to necessarily answer any dilemma other than the one in the post immediately above the one you are making, I mean unless you're really interested in doing so or something.

There's a guy filling a soda or candy dispensing machine on your floor at work/outside your accomodation block, the fire alarm sounds and everyone is evacuated, on return you discover that they have not locked the cabinet again, do you call it in or help yourself to some soda and candy first?

 

[Jaguar]

Tell them I want the manager. Now.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

The last one isn't really a dilemma. You either do the ethical or you don't. I'd do it, and call in the open machine.

This one is inspired by just war theory, which I've coincidentally been reading about today. I've never given much thought to military ethics, since I'm not in the military. The interesting thing to me was that just war theory offered a middle ground between pacifism and militarism or realism. Of course, within that, there are many different view points. Anyway, it seemed to me that it might be an interesting thing to consider for anyone interested in theories of ethics.

You are a general facing an enemy that has only one factory producing a specific type of plane that outclasses anything your air force has. You have superior numbers of airplanes, but the improved quality of the plane means that all aerial battles are a stalemate. If they stopped being able to produce that plane, your side would easily have air superiority, and should be able to force a surrender within three months. The war has dragged on for three years. The factory, however, is staffed entirely by civilian workers. Do you bomb the factory and destroy production of the airplane that is prolonging the war?

 

[Virtual ghost]

Anyway, I'll kick things off with the first dilemma then:

You are in a que for coffee and its a long que, everyone is in a hurry, when you go to counter to collect your coffee there's a lot of people milling around, there's no one you know and presume you dont know any of the baristas either, however, you notice a wallet left on the counter, there's a number of cards in it, folding money and photos but not anything with phone numbers or addresses which would readily identify the owner, what do you do?

I would just give it to police. Since leaving it there would probably only rise the chances of abuse and cops in my country are ok people.
I fail to really see the dillema here.


However the way how things are structured in my country the only way to find such wallet is if someone already took out all of the personal data (which is on just about everything). What means that money and cards probably wouldn't be there either.

 

[Lark]

The last one isn't really a dilemma. You either do the ethical or you don't. I'd do it, and call in the open machine.

This one is inspired by just war theory, which I've coincidentally been reading about today. I've never given much thought to military ethics, since I'm not in the military. The interesting thing to me was that just war theory offered a middle ground between pacifism and militarism or realism. Of course, within that, there are many different view points. Anyway, it seemed to me that it might be an interesting thing to consider for anyone interested in theories of ethics.

You are a general facing an enemy that has only one factory producing a specific type of plane that outclasses anything your air force has. You have superior numbers of airplanes, but the improved quality of the plane means that all aerial battles are a stalemate. If they stopped being able to produce that plane, your side would easily have air superiority, and should be able to force a surrender within three months. The war has dragged on for three years. The factory, however, is staffed entirely by civilian workers. Do you bomb the factory and destroy production of the airplane that is prolonging the war?

The temptation to take without payment isnt a dilemma but what to do with a wallet full of the means of payment is?

I think the airstripe/munitions strip geys bombed, regretable that there are casualties but all casualties are regretable, overall with available data in your example loss of life will be reduced by a quick conclusion of the conflict.

You see a trusted friend in a restaurant with someone other than their spouse, later in the week the spouse asks you how your evening with trusted friend went, do you tell them that they were in someone else's company?

 

[Typh0n]

Nah, it's their issue, their relationship let them figure it all out.

 

[Lark]

Nah, it's their issue, their relationship let them figure it all out.

So you say nothing or say something which validates the spouse's story?

What is your dilemma, you leave an answer and then a dilemma.

A state of emergency has been declared. Shortages are beginning to bite and people are going hungry. You have secretly a basement full of supplies, enough to keep you going for a good year. The authorities say they will restore order in a month at least. There is a family in the neighbourhood which has been particularly badly hit, they have children who may not survive a month of further scarcity. Do you help them out with some of your supplies, revealing that you have them, or do you keep the secret?

 

[The Cat]

So you say nothing or say something which validates the spouse's story?

What is your dilemma, you leave an answer and then a dilemma.

A state of emergency has been declared. Shortages are beginning to bite and people are going hungry. You have secretly a basement full of supplies, enough to keep you going for a good year. The authorities say they will restore order in a month at least. There is a family in the neighbourhood which has been particularly badly hit, they have children who may not survive a month of further scarcity. Do you help them out with some of your supplies, revealing that you have them, or do you keep the secret?

I keep the secret, but make sure they receive what they need anonymously. But then again I might not.

Two people are in mortal danger. One is a stranger. One is someone you love. You can save one. Choose.

 

[Lark]

I definitely would save the person I love, it doesnt even have to be that I love them that much, so long as I know them. It pays not to be a stranger when its in the balance and I can come to the rescue.

Same question, sort of, two people are in mortal danger. One is a favourite author. One is a doctor, a pediatrician maybe. You can save one. Choose.

 

[Lark]

I'd save the Doctor probably.

You are going to the newsagent and your friend asks you to buy them a lottery ticket when you are there and gives you the money for it. You do but forget about it as you and your friends have plans for that weekend. Its a fantastic weekend, one to remember and afterwards, at the beginning of the week you discover that the lottery, which is a triple roll over, has gone unclaimed. You check the ticket and low and behold your friend's ticket is a winner. Do you give your friend the ticket and hope they will think of you and give you some of the winnings or do you forget about your friend and claim the money yourself?

 

[Bush]

*rubs hands together*

You are in a que for coffee and its a long que, everyone is in a hurry, when you go to counter to collect your coffee there's a lot of people milling around, there's no one you know and presume you dont know any of the baristas either, however, you notice a wallet left on the counter, there's a number of cards in it, folding money and photos but not anything with phone numbers or addresses which would readily identify the owner, what do you do?

Take it to the manager if I happen to see them, or the cashier if I don't. Because (a) I trust them more than I do all of the strangers who might stumble upon it because chances are that one of them would take it, and (b) if the person missing the wallet were to go back and look for it, he/she'd probably ask the staff about it and so it'd be easier for them to find it.

You are unfortunately very sick and death is certain. While alone in your bed, a mysterious person appears out of nowhere and presents you with two opportunities. You can survive by either possessing a random human or a mighty mountain gorilla, or you can simply decline. You are given no further information and the choice must be made on the spot. What do you choose?

Human. Sorry, guy who I'm replacing!

There's a guy filling a soda or candy dispensing machine on your floor at work/outside your accomodation block, the fire alarm sounds and everyone is evacuated, on return you discover that they have not locked the cabinet again, do you call it in or help yourself to some soda and candy first?

I'd probably take a can of soda or something, unless that would delay me enough that I get caught in the fire and die and couldn't get into heaven on account of violating the Eighth Commandment.

You are a general facing an enemy that has only one factory producing a specific type of plane that outclasses anything your air force has. You have superior numbers of airplanes, but the improved quality of the plane means that all aerial battles are a stalemate. If they stopped being able to produce that plane, your side would easily have air superiority, and should be able to force a surrender within three months. The war has dragged on for three years. The factory, however, is staffed entirely by civilian workers. Do you bomb the factory and destroy production of the airplane that is prolonging the war?

Sounds kind of like what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki

You see a trusted friend in a restaurant with someone other than their spouse, later in the week the spouse asks you how your evening with trusted friend went, do you tell them that they were in someone else's company?

If asked if they were with anyone else, I would; though that seems like it'd be an odd question to ask. Otherwise, I don't volunteer the information.

For all I know, it could be a friend or coworker of theirs; maybe even a mutual one between the spouse and trusted friend. Hell again, the spouse might already know about it.

A state of emergency has been declared. Shortages are beginning to bite and people are going hungry. You have secretly a basement full of supplies, enough to keep you going for a good year. The authorities say they will restore order in a month at least. There is a family in the neighbourhood which has been particularly badly hit, they have children who may not survive a month of further scarcity. Do you help them out with some of your supplies, revealing that you have them, or do you keep the secret?

I'd bite the bullet and do it.

Two people are in mortal danger. One is a stranger. One is someone you love. You can save one. Choose.

The person I love. Sorry, stranger!

Same question, sort of, two people are in mortal danger. One is a favourite author. One is a doctor, a pediatrician maybe. You can save one. Choose.

Doctor. If the author has influenced me, it's more than likely that they've already produced the work(s) that I like.. which won't disappear when they're dead. Sorry, artist!

You are going to the newsagent and your friend asks you to buy them a lottery ticket when you are there and gives you the money for it. You do but forget about it as you and your friends have plans for that weekend. Its a fantastic weekend, one to remember and afterwards, at the beginning of the week you discover that the lottery, which is a triple roll over, has gone unclaimed. You check the ticket and low and behold your friend's ticket is a winner. Do you give your friend the ticket and hope they will think of you and give you some of the winnings or do you forget about your friend and claim the money yourself?

It's my friend's ticket. They get the earnings.

 

[Typh0n]

I think I'd have a talk with my friend about it, hopefully we come to some kind of agreement to split the money somehow someway, it's probably enough for both of us anyways.

This one concerns self-interest more than ethics towards others, but it's technically an ethical dilemna. You are dissastified with your life and one night a genie appears to you and gives you a choice: you can spend the next three weeks of your life with your ideal lover, whatever that may be to you, it will be filled with intense bliss, and then, when the three weeks are up, you die - or you can go on living as if the genie never appeared, with no guarantees about finding happiness, but no reason to think you will die withing three weeks. Which one do you choose?

 

[Bush]

Here's one. Trolley problem. Go.