Moral Dilemmas:

On Personal and Communal Levels

A Group Compilation

Submitted to

Jervie Q. Padrones

Part-time Instructor

Jose Rizal Memorial State University

Dapitan

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements of the Course

Ethics

GE-E

By

Alisah Jean M.Calabria

Alex Andrea Lee G. Lomongo

May 13, 2019

I. Introduction

A moral dilemma entails a choice between two highly conflicting values, where the

decision made may result in guilt and remorse. As responders we are able to assess our own

values in regards to the character’s actions. As human beings with rationality, we are forced

to accept the inevitability of being unwilling confronted with situations that test strength of

our morality and character. Every day we are tested as individuals who make the right

choice. How we view ourselves as individuals and how others view us are directly correlated

to our moral decision-making. But morals are somewhat misleading. What might be a wrong

decision for one person might be a solution to another.

In the midst of deep moral conflict we become immensely introspective and we follow

our intuition with hopes of it guiding us towards the morally correct decision. However, how

can we be sure that we have acted morally in a situation?

A moral dilemma is a situation where the decision-maker has to give priority to one

moral value over another. A person facing a dilemma must decide which moral duty to

prioritize and “whichever action is taken it will offend an important moral value”. In a moral

dilemma, it is possible to live up all of one’s moral convictions and beliefs regarding how

one should behave in that situation.

Moral dilemmas are everywhere in organizational life. Situations on the entire scale from

real and acute dilemmas all in way to false pseudo-dilemmas constitute challenges that the

decision-maker should prepare for. These things are not easy, the way you think.
 II. Importance of Ethical Framework

The importance of having a good ethical framework to work to is essential, it helps to

give guidance to every individual as well as giving wide view for decision-making as ethical

framework considers values, principals and personal morals. It helps every individual to be

non-judgement to whatever result and decision might come whether that be around sex,

religion, sexuality, culture, disability. It molds oneself to be composed and open-minded.

Having an ethical framework can be an extremely difficult subject to define and discuss as it

closely related to one’s own unique moral, cultural and spiritual values. It is not a burden to

bear, but a prudent and effective guide which furthers life and success. By learning and

applying a good ethical framework, exceptional behaviour must also be acquired with this

regard as these help to build a strong career governed by the rules of ethics to safeguard one

self and others.

Moreover, making ethical decisions requires sensitivity to the ethical implications of

problems and situations and a practiced method for exploring the ethical aspects of a decision

and weighing the considerations that should impact the choice of a course of action which is

the reason why a framework for ethical decision-making is essential.

III. The Moral Dilemmas

A. Personal

Consider you are a bomb expert and known to be the only one bomb expert in

your town. Unfortunately, you received an alert that there are 2 bombing incidents in

your area occurring at different locations. The first location is in the Mall, wherein

numerous V.I.P’s were settling for an important seminar on the second floor. The

second location is in a restaurant where your beloved family is dining in, celebrating
the 40th birthday of your wife. Both incidents are only 5 minutes away from your area

and the time of the bombs holds for about only 10 minutes to explode the entire place.

You only have remaining 5 minutes to diffuse the bomb. However, you have just

received a message from a back-up team, but it will consume almost 12 minutes of

travel before it will arrive. What will you do?

a) Save your family and let the bomb on the mall explode where top ranking

officials and commoners where present.

b) Forget your family and save the people in the mall especially the V.I.P’s.

The dilemma mentioned above is considered as moral dilemma as it compasses the

major three crucial features of moral dilemma which are the agent is required to do

each of the actions and, the agent can do each of the actions, but cannot do both (or

all) of the actions. The crucial features were clearly seen in the statement as well as

on the choice of decisions one would impart.

Amidst of the six characteristics being exhibited in the lesson, the standards that are

present on the problem are the following: first, moral standards involve serious wrong

or significant benefis. This standard is clearly seen in the problem as it deals with life,

people and precedence.

And ought to be preferred to other. These standadrds are clearly seen the problem as

it deals with life, people and precedence that matters with serious impacts to the

focused as well.

Second, the moral standards are not established by authoritative figures, the problem

has the standard of not being biased and are associated with special emotions and
 vocabulary. These standards are found on the problem as the validity of the decision

lies on the soundness or adequacy of the reasons, drives the adequate consideration to

the interest of all concerned parties and generally put forth imperative.

By reviewing and identifying the standards being found and considered on the

problem it ought to made the problem a moral dilemma, it has most of the

characteristics needed for a dilemma to be considered as moral.

Facts gathered

 There 2 bomb threat in their place with different areas but the same time and date

of explosion.

 There is only one bomb expert that is present to diffused the bomb.

Stakeholders

 Primary- the bomb expert, his family, the VIP’s, commoners who were present.

 Secondary- the owner of the mall & restaurant, rescuer

Articulate the dilemma

 In accordance with the case,we have concluded that the core of the problem is

whether he has the right to put on his hands the right to decide who would die

between those people because both of them have the right to live and right to be

saved and not just live on by chance on the officers hands.

a) Save your family and let the bomb on the mall explode where top ranking

officials and commoners where present.

 b) Forget your family and save the people in the mall especially the V.I.P’s.

The alternatives are then being compared to the approaches of the consequentialist

theory, which are the duty-based approach and the right approach. The first alternative is

being considered as similar to the right approach due to the reason that the bomb expert

would chose his family over the VIP’s because they means a lot to him and that decision

is much heavier. Moreover, the second alternative is being compared to duty-based

approach as the agent would chose the VIP’s over his family it is because that is his duty.

By articulating ang examining the problem and its alternatives we have professed that the

right approach weights more than the duty-based approach.

B. Communal dilemma

Consider you are a police commissioned officer and is assigned to direct one of the

Philippine Public Safety College / Academy, the Philippine National Police

Academy. It is then, exhibited that this year, you will be administering again the

PNPA cadet admission exam for young men/ women who are willing to join the

phase. The selection of the chosen few is tough for the organization was really strict

in the process and qualification. However, one of your former colleague on the

academy has a daughter who applied for cadetship program but failed to continue due

to things that leads her to serious disqualification. He asked you intently that her

daughter be inserted in the final list of cadets who will be attending the oathtaking

and reception rights for class 2050. You have considered that collegue as one of your

closest family friend as he was once your buddy inside when both of you are still
 cadets and owed so much things to him and might lose the friendship made. His

favour made you feel anxious as you have seen the rest of other applicants sacrificing

and rendering their time and effort truthfully just to achieve the slots for the program

of cadetship. Also,considering the process follows a certain values and dues. The

future and outcome lies in your decision. What will you do?

a) Put your collegues daughter on the final list. Eventhough the 250 list of

required names were already done. And come to decide on forfeiting one

name to fill-in your collegues daughter. That name is a forth taker, came from

an average family and has the overall qualification of becoming a cadet.

b) Disregard your colleague’s request by applying what is due on the processing

in accordance to what the organizations consummate in choosing the worthy

incoming cadets.

The dilemma mentioned above is considered as moral dilemma as it compasses the major

three crucial features of moral dilemma which are the agent is required to do each of the

actions and, the agent can do each of the actions, but cannot do both (or all) of the

actions. The crucial features were clearly seen in the statement as well as on the choice of

decisions one would impart.

Standard found

 Moral standard ought to be preferred to other values

-precedence

 Moral standard are not biased

 - Friendship is not. Friendship is different from fairness. Maintenance of

impersonal relationship. Rational decision can only be made

objectively and without emotions.

 Moral standards are associated with special emotions and vocabulary.

-prescriptivity/equity

By reviewing and identifying the standards being found and considered on the

problem it ought to made the problem a moral dilemma, it has most of the

characteristics needed for a dilemma to be considered as moral.

Facts gathered

 The police commissioned officer is responsible for choosing the applicants

 Backer system is present

Stakeholders

 Primary- the officer, his collegue, the daughter, the forth taker applicant

 Secondary- the other applicants, the parents of the forth taker applicant

Articulate the dilemma

 Favour of his colleague to make his daughter be inserted in the final list and if he

will consider it or objectively follow the due process.

In accordance with the dilemma, the core of the problem being found, was about

on the consideration inserting his colleagues on the list without following the due
 process and does friendship weight more than fairness. It was being pin pointed as

the core of the problem for it is clearly seen on the alternatives being presented.

a) Put your collegues daughter on the final list. Eventhough the 250 list

of required names were already done. And come to decide on

forfeiting one name to fill-in your collegues daughter. That name is a

forth taker, came from an average family and has the overall

qualification of becoming a cadet.

b) Disregard your colleague’s request by applying what is due on the

processing in accordance to what the organizations consummate in

choosing the worthy incoming cadets.

In addition, if the core of the problem will be considered everytime in every

aspects of jobs and organization you have been part of. The qualifications they

have made will be useless for at the end of the day, selection are not already base

on potential and capabilities but on the system of backer.

The alternatives are then being compaired to the approaches of two main theories: the

consequentialist and non- consequentialist which are the fairness or justice approach and

the egoism approach. The first alternative is being considered as similar to egoistic

approach due to the reason that the agent accepted his collegue’s request for he has also

the will to return what he has owed when they were still cadets. Both sides benefited and

the will produce the greatest amount of good for him and happiness for his colleague and

his family. Moreover, the second alternatives is being compared to the fairness and

justice approach as the agent has the power to consider both partners with equity

regardless of his relationship with his friend and/ or to the lifeof other applicants.
 By deeply examining and articulating the problem and its alternatives we have professed

that the fairness and justice approach weights more than the 1 st alternative which has the

principle of egoistic. We have deciphered that being part of this type of community and

job, fairness should always be exercised and applied in every situation, for it is then the

justice follows.

IV. Challenges to the Human Person: Character

By answering the dilemmas being mentioned it helped and mold our character or moral

character as it improves our attitudes relevant in the leadership development area. By

engaging in different type of moral dilemmas. It improves the character to have excellent

decisions making which will make an individual the sort of ethically admirable person that he

is. Through leaning to solve a moral dilemma, a moral character is being firmly mold in

tendency to take pleasure from self-realizing activity and the tendency to form friendly

feelings towards others under specific circumstances. Moreover, it helps our character to be

more morally responsible in things that we encounter in our everyday life improving and

sharpening the variety of attribute a man can possess like empathy, fortitude, courage and

honesty.