Scribd
Upload
8 views2 pages

Final-Assignment_ESGUERRA

The document presents a final assignment in ethics where the author addresses four moral dilemmas. In each scenario, the author explains their reasoning based on ethical principles such as honesty, accountability, and the doctrine of double effect. The responses emphasize the importance of making ethical choices even in difficult situations, prioritizing truth and respect for life and justice.

Uploaded by

yumesguerra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
8 views2 pages

Final-Assignment_ESGUERRA

The document presents a final assignment in ethics where the author addresses four moral dilemmas. In each scenario, the author explains their reasoning based on ethical principles such as honesty, accountability, and the doctrine of double effect. The responses emphasize the importance of making ethical choices even in difficult situations, prioritizing truth and respect for life and justice.

Uploaded by

yumesguerra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Esguerra, Hyam Manuel T.

Final Assignment in Ethics


202212457

ASSIGNMENT: Applying the foregoing principles solve the following moral dilemmas
and explain your answers thoroughly. Submit your answers printed in short coupon
bond paper on or before our last class meeting before your final exams.

1. A day before the wedding of your friend, you discovered that your friend’s spouse-to-be is
having an affair with an officemate. You caught them sneaking out of a hotel together. What
will you do? Explain your answer.

I would tell my friend about the affair before the wedding. While this may ruin the
wedding plans and preparations, it aligns with the principles of honesty, respect for the
marriage commitment, and care for my friend's wellbeing. Getting married without knowing
about the affair would be based on deception, which could severely damage the relationship
later. As a good friend, I have an obligation to share this difficult truth compassionately, even
if it leads to painful consequences in the short term. In the long run, having this information
could save my friend from deeper heartbreak and allow them to make a fully informed
decision about their commitment.

2. You are an eyewitness to a robbery. Your friend robbed a rich woman for him to pay for his
son’s crucial operation. You know he committed the crime. If you go to the police to report
the crime, there is the strong possibility that the money will be returned to the rich woman.
What will you do? Will you report the crime and tell the truth to the police or say nothing
since the money will be used for the operation and the son’s life will be save? Justify your
answer.

I would not report the crime to the police. While stealing is illegal, this situation
satisfies the conditions of the doctrine of double effect: the intended act (funding a life-
saving operation) is good, the bad effect (theft) was not willed as a means to this end but as
an unintended side effect, and there is a proportionately grave reason (saving a life). I would
emphasize that this is an extreme case where no reasonable legal alternatives were
available. However, I would counsel my friend to explore lawful means to reimburse the
victim over time if possible.

3. On your way home one night, you figured in a car accident. While driving your car, you
accidently hit and killed a pedestrian. As you got out of the car, you were intercepted by a
crying lady who thought that she was the one who hit and killed the pedestrian. There were
only three people on the scene: you, the lady and the dead person you hit on the road. There
were no other witnesses. Thus, you know that whoever is responsible will be sent to jail.
What will you do? Explain your answer.

I would take responsibility for causing the accident and admit to killing the pedestrian,
even though the crying lady mistakenly thought she was responsible. Allowing an innocent
person to be unjustly punished for a crime they did not commit would be unethical. While
telling the truth may lead to legal consequences for me, it is the right thing to do based on
the principles of honesty, accountability, and respect for justice. I did not intend to kill the
pedestrian, but I am still responsible for the consequences of my actions behind the wheel.

4. You are a doctor at a hospital. You have five seriously ill patient, four of them are in
urgent need of organ transplants. You cannot help them because there are no available
organs that can be used to save their lives. The fifth patient, a criminal, has a lingering illness
that can no longer be treated. If he dies, you will be able to save the other four patients by
using his organs for transplant. What will you do? Explain your answer.

I would not harvest the criminal's organs to save the other four patients. While saving
four lives is extremely valuable, intentionally killing someone, even a criminal, as a means to
that end violates the ethical principles against using evil means for a good end. It fails the
second condition of double effect by making the criminal's death the means of procuring the
organs, rather than an unintended side effect. There are also concerns about violating the
criminal's autonomy and consent regarding organ donation. If the criminal were already
deceased or brain-dead, using their organs could be permissible with family consent, but
not by intentionally ending their life.

You might also like