Abstract
This paper discusses the moral dilemma I once faced in experimenting with cocaine. The paper discusses what the utilitarian, categorical imperative, and virtue ethics positions would have instructed me to do. The utilitarian position would give me a green light, since it values individual freedom. The imperative would say no, since there are higher moral laws. The virtue ethics position would also say no, since doing the virtuous thing is the priority. 9 pgs. Bibliography lists 3 sources.

Abstract
The writer outlines the situation and discusses the conflicting values involved as well as the personal values of the client which came to the fore in determining the proper course of action. In addition, the paper looks at the deliberative process which took place as well as the moral insights gleaned from course readings and discussions which make it easy to see why the writer's final decision was the right one. As a last point, the paper also includes a brief outline for an oral presentation which is based upon this paper.

Tags:moral, dilemma, principles

Abstract
The paper discusses how Kant emphasizes the presence of a good will in the person, the importance of duty and, above all, the use of the categorical imperative. The paper explains that in a situation where telling the truth and lying appear to be equally bad, the categorical imperative is the best solution for the dilemma. The paper then discusses how utilitarianism argues the direct opposite since it focuses on consequences while Kant believes they have no place in this situation.

From the Paper
"Kant emphasizes the presence of a good will in the person, the importance of duty and, above all, the use of the categorical imperative. In a situation where telling the truth and lying appear to be equally bad, the categorical imperative is the best solution for the dilemma. Utilitarianism argues the direct opposite since it focuses on consequences while Kant believes they have no place in this situation. Kant is the philosopher who is concerned with moral choice when he offers a way out of a dilemma. A simple situation is that a coworker is very excited after applying for a..."

Tags:kant, utilitarianism, dilemma

Abstract
The paper describes the scenario where a 5-year-old boy witnessed his father out for dinner with a woman who was not his mother and is thus confronted with the moral dilemma of whether or not to tell, in regards to both his mother and father. The paper considers the issue from Piaget's perspective who theorizes that the moral dilemma is essentially a stage above the child's development; he is not entirely equipped with the necessary skills to understand the moral implications of the situation. The paper then looks at Kohlberg's ideas and how he believes that the child's self interest and lack of full logic cannot enable him to make an entirely self-actualized decision. The paper therefore shows how from the perspectives of both Piaget and Kohlberg, the child is not fit to deal with the situation.

Outline:
An Introductory Moral Dilemma
Piaget's Perspective
The Kohlberg Stage
Conclusion

From the Paper
"In the case of moral dilemmas, children experience the situation in a rather different fashion than that of adults. This is largely due to the fact that children are in the process of growing and forming their perceptions of the world, and thus their stage of development is to be taken into account when assessing their reaction. In the instance of a moral dilemma, this development is to be of particular note, as some children may not have developed the cognitive abilities necessary to property deal with a particular situation, thereby making the unprepared for both the consequences, and implications, of their decision."

Tags:child, development, reasoning, logic, capacities

Abstract
This is a paper on the moral dilemma faced by Captain Vere is Melville's "Billy Budd". The author examines the events and the plot in the novel as well as the major themes and focuses on one of the main characters in the novel, Captain Vere and the moral dilemma he faces when Claggart arrives and the captain has to decide whether Claggart is lying.

From the Paper
"Melville in Billy Budd introduces his characters through an introductory sketch after which they enter into the narrative. These descriptive sketches provide the necessary background for each character and prepare the reader for the part each is to play in the narrative. The characters are further developed by means of words or phrases, which are repeatedly used to describe them, or by means of characteristic phrases, which they repeatedly utter. For example, Captain Vere by his nickname of "Starry" Vere. Then the characters are described through repeated references to their appearance. The 'aristocratic' Captain Vere is a reflection of the real character. (Mumford, 1929)."

Tags:liar, loyalty, billy, claggart, vere, moral, decision

Abstract
This paper takes a look at the philosophy of a moral dilemma. This paper discusses the sad scenario of the unfaithful wife known as "Jane" who finds herself faced with two equally unpleasant choices that are the consequences of her infidelity. The paper reviews and discusses these choices from different moral and philosophical perspectives.

From the Paper
"The advocate of social contract theory would stress that marriage is a social contract. When Jane violated this social contract, she did not merely personally cause her husband to feel bad. She also caused a rift in one of the institutions that uphold modern society. Even if no one is directly harmed by her actions, by devaluing the institution of marriage, either her own or the institution of the man whom she transgressed with, she is still doing harm to society. A social contract theorist would care little about Jane, her husband's, or the other man's feelings like a virtue ethicist. Rather the theorist would view Jane's decisions from a societal rubric, and point out that if every person felt free to be unfaithful, the moral fabric of society would completely disintegrate. "

Tags:social, contract, theorist, society, sex, unfaithful, virtue, ethicist, ethics, utilitarian

Abstract
This study examines the moral decision of Antigone, in Sophocles' play "Antigone", to bury her dead brother against the legal decree of Creon, the King of Thebes. It explains that Antigone grants that her brother Polyneices has indeed broken the law by trying to take over Thebes (the reason that Creon wants to disallow his burial), but Antigone argues that there is a higher law than the legal code, a higher law which is based on the sacred tie of blood relations. She argues that the Gods support her in her effort to bury her brother. It shows that even though the decision may cost her her life, but she is determined to do everything she can to follow and abide by what she sees as a higher moral calling. After an examination of the decision itself, this study applies the ethical theories of Immanuel Kant and Jeremy Bentham to that decision.

From the Paper
"Creon and Antigone could not stand in more stark contrast to one another in terms of the qualities important to each. Creon may have the civic law on his side, and he may argue from that basis, at least on the surface, but the play shows that his major concerns are pride and revenge, not following the law. Antigone, on the other hand, cares only about doing what is right according to the highest standards of humanity and of the gods. She wants to bury her brother as much as Creon wants to prevent his burial. A powerful clue to the essential stands of each character is that Antigone determinedly maintains her ethical stand to the end, while Creon changes his mind and buries Polyneices--although he acts too late to avert the catastrophe prophesied by Teiresias."

Tags:creon, gods, Polyneices, kant, bentham

Abstract
The following paper examines a study of moral dilemmas which attempted to use in-depth critical thinking to assess the moral decisions of five individuals. In the study scenario, morality has a price and the individuals were given a choice between what they wanted to do and what they wanted or desired. Neither decision was desirable and a person's values and ethics determined their choice. The writer argues that there is no right or wrong answer and none of the participants had a better answer than the others.

From the Paper
"A moral dilemma involves a situation that gives a person two possible courses of action, each requiring a morally impermissible action. Plato presented a classic example of a moral dilemma in his teachings. A man borrowed a weapon from his neighbor and gave him a promise that he would return it. The neighbor returns to him shortly after to claim the weapon but is in a fit of rage. He wants the weapon back so that he can kill someone. This creates a moral dilemma for the borrower. If he keeps his promise and returns the weapon, he will be an accessory to murder. If he refuses to return the weapon, he has broken his promise. "

Tags:psychologist, brain, handles, dilemmas, moral, decisions, emotional, responses, logical, analyses

Abstract
The paper discusses how Marilyn Cross's bold and impetuous sneaking aboard Barton's space ship has put the pilot in a moral dilemma: dump the kid or sacrifice the lives of six half-cadavors. The paper asserts that she did not committ an act so terrible that we would normally consider deserving of an execution, but the nature of the mission gives Barton no choice; he had his orders and followed a utilitarian path that, however gross and heartwrenching it may be, is obviously the right one: he's got a bunch of other people to save. The paper asserts that the way the story is structured, the question is put unfairly to the reader: if the stowaway was male (or male and older) there would no question of shooting him out into space with the garbage. The paper argues that male valour (or the myths of it that we live with and cultivate) is being manipulated by the writer for the sake of making the question more complicated than it is.

From the Paper
"Marilyn Cross's bold and impetuous sneaking aboard Barton's space ship has put the pilot in a moral dilemma: dump the kid or sacrifice the lives of six half-cadavors. She did not committ an act so terrible that we would normally consider deserving of an execution, but the nature of the mission gives Barton no choice. He had his orders and followed a utilitarian path that, however gross and heartwrenching it may be, is obviously the right one: he's got a bunch of other people to save. If he could find a way around putting Marilyn in harm's way, he happily would have. But the way the story is structured, the question is put unfairly to the reader: if the stowaway was male (or male and older) there would no question of..."

Tags:morality, problems, rights

Abstract
This paper examines the conflict a soldier faces between following orders and following morality; military code and personal responsibility for one's actions. The author discussed the Nuremberg trials, the Geneva Convention, and the My Lai massacre.

From the Paper:

"The most obvious party responsible for what the military does is the military itself. The people who actually carry out the violence of war and those who give the direct order to do so are most clearly responsible for the results. They bear the brunt of the physical evidence that war leaves behind. Members of the armed forces are also the most at risk to face the consequences of the violence they cause because of the conflicting beliefs they are asked to hold. The concepts of personal responsibility and superior orders constitute a type of ethical doublespeak that creates a moral dilemma for military personnel."

Tags:convention, geneva, lai, massacre, morality, nuremburg, soldier, trials, war