Lesson 3: MORAL

DILEMMA
 LEARNING OUTCOMES

After studying this chapter, the students should be able

to:
1. Identify and describe a moral experience;
2. Classify the three types of dilemmas and Kohlberg’s
Stages of Moral development; and
3. Write a moral dilemma based on their own experience.
INTRODUCTION
Moral dilemmas are situations in which the decision-maker must consider two
or more moral values or duties but can only honor one of them. Thus, the
individual will violate at least one important moral concern, regardless of the
decision. This chapter draws a distinction between moral dilemmas. Thus are
situations in which the tension is between moral values or duties that are,
more or less, on equal footing. In a real dilemma, the choice is between a
wrong and another, roughly equal wrong. Hence, there are also situations in
which the decision-maker has a moral duty to act in one way but is tempted or
pressured to act in another way. In a false dilemma, the choice is actually
between a right and a wrong.
 LECTURE NOTES

The concept of Moral Dilemmas

Do you remember a time when you had to make a choice and each option was
equally unpleasant? Perhaps you lied, and something terrible happened, or you were
faced with the task of divulging the truth and being punished for lying. This mess is
called a dilemma: a situation that challenges an agreeable solution. In literature,
dilemmas form the central conflict many protagonists encounter. Many people face all
kinds of dilemmas in life, and the choice they make can have long-lasting impacts.
Sometimes these dilemmas have even caused changes in society and history. Thus, a
moral dilemma is a conflict in which you have to choose between two or more actions
and have moral reasons for choosing each action.
 The three types of Dilemmas

1.) A classic dilemma is a choice between two or more alternatives,

in which the outcomes are equally undesirable, or equally
favorable. The dilemma does not typically involve a moral or
ethical crisis, but the person or character’s life may change as a
result of their decision. Some examples of classic dilemmas
include:
• Deciding where to go for dinner on a first date
• Uncertainty about which job offer to take
• Wondering whether or not to make the move to a new city
Classic dilemmas are more than simple choices,
because they usually prompt the person to think
about the outcomes of the choices. As a result, a
character in a story may find themselves on an
adventure, in fear for their lives, or instituting
change because of the choice they made in their
dilemma.
2. An ethical dilemma arises when a person is forced to decide
between two morally sound options, but they may conflict with
the established boundaries of a business, a governmental agency,
or the law. Some ethical dilemmas may involve following the
truth versus being loyal to a friend; following the laws or rules
versus having compassion for an individual’s plight; and concerns
about an individual person versus the larger impact on a
community. An ethical dilemma differs from a moral dilemma
because it very much involves following rules rather than one’s
conscience, although one’s conscience can certainly move an
individual to consider breaking the rules.
Some examples of ethical dilemmas include:

• A secretary discovers her boss has been laundering money,

and she must decide whether or not to turn him in.
• A doctor refuses to give a terminal patient morphine, but the
nurse can see the patient is in agony.
• While responding to a domestic violence call, a police officer
finds out that the assailant is the brother of the police chief,
and the police chief tells the officer to “make it go away”.
3. A moral dilemma is a situation in which a person is torn between right and
wrong. A moral dilemma involves a conflict with the very core of a person’s
principles and values. The choice the person makes may leave them feeling
burdened, guilty, relieved, or questioning their values. A moral dilemma
often forces the individual to decide which option he or she can live with,
but any outcomes are extremely unpleasant no matter what. Some examples
of moral dilemmas include:
• The classic “lifeboat dilemma”, where there are only 10 spaces in the
lifeboat, but there are 11 passengers on the sinking ship. A decision must be
made as to who will stay behind.
• A husband learns he has a terminal illness and he decides to ask his wife for
assistance in ending the pain before it gets too bad.
• A friend discovers her best friend’s boyfriend is cheating. She must decide
whether to tell her friend or keep it a secret.
 The three Stages of Moral Development

Lawrence Kohlberg (1958) agreed with Piaget's (1932) theory

of moral development in principle but wanted to develop his
ideas further.  He used Piaget’s storytelling technique to tell
people stories involving moral dilemmas.  In each case, he
presented a choice to be considered, for example, between
the rights of some authority and the needs of some deserving
individual who is being unfairly treated. One of the best
known of Kohlberg’s (1958) stories concerns a man called
Heinz who lived somewhere in Europe.
In the photo: Lawrence Kohlberg
Photo soruce: totallyhistory.com
Heinz’s wife was dying from a particular type of cancer. Doctors said a
new drug might save her. The drug had been discovered by a local
chemist, and the Heinz tried desperately to buy some, but the
chemist was charging ten times the money it cost to make the drug,
and this was much more than the Heinz could afford. Heinz could
only raise half the money, even after help from family and friends. He
explained to the chemist that his wife was dying and asked if he could
have the drug cheaper or pay the rest of the money later.
The chemist refused, saying that he had discovered the drug and was
going to make money from it. The husband was desperate to save his
wife, so later that night he broke into the chemist’s and stole the
drug.
Kohlberg asked a series of questions such as:

1. Should Heinz have stolen the drug?

2. Would it change anything if Heinz did not love his wife?
3. What if the person dying was a stranger, would it make any
difference?
4. Should the police arrest the chemist for murder if the
woman died?
By studying the answers from children of different ages to these questions,
Kohlberg hoped to discover how moral reasoning changed as people grew
older. The sample comprised 72 Chicago boys aged 10–16 years, 58 of whom
were followed up at three-yearly intervals for 20 years (Kohlberg, 1984). Each
boy was given a 2-hour interview based on the ten dilemmas. What Kohlberg
was mainly interested in was not whether the boys judged the action right or
wrong, but the reasons given for the decision. He found that these reasons
tended to change as the children got older. Kohlberg identified three distinct
levels of moral reasoning: pre-conventional, conventional, and post-
conventional. Each level has two sub-stages. People can only pass through
these levels in the order listed. Each new stage replaces the reasoning typical
of the earlier stage. Not everyone achieves all the stages.
Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development
You may watch it on youtube : https://youtu.be/GTzBrjxKHLg

Level 1 - Pre-conventional morality

At the pre-conventional level (most nine-year-olds and younger, some over nine), we
don’t have a personal code of morality. Instead, our moral code is shaped by the
standards of adults and the consequences of following or breaking their rules.
Authority is outside the individual and reasoning is based on the physical consequences
of actions.
• Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation. The child/individual is good in order
to avoid being punished. If a person is punished, they must have done wrong.
• Stage 2. Individualism and Exchange. At this stage, children recognize that there is not
just one right view that is handed down by the authorities. Different individuals have
different viewpoints.
 Level 2 - Conventional morality
At the conventional level (most adolescents and adults), we begin to
internalize the moral standards of valued adult role models.Authority is
internalized but not questioned, and reasoning is based on the norms of the
group to which the person belongs.
• Stage 3. Good Interpersonal Relationships. The child/individual is good in
order to be seen as being a good person by others. Therefore, answers
relate to the approval of others.
• Stage 4. Maintaining the Social Order. The child/individual becomes aware
of the wider rules of society, so judgments concern obeying the rules in
order to uphold the law and to avoid guilt.
 Level 3 - Post-conventional morality
Individual judgment is based on self-chosen principles, and moral reasoning
is based on individual rights and justice. According to Kohlberg this level of
moral reasoning is as far as most people get.

Only 10-15% are capable of the kind of abstract thinking necessary for stage
5 or 6 (post-conventional morality). That is to say, most people take their
moral views from those around them and only a minority think through
ethical principles for themselves.
• Stage 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights. The child/individual becomes aware that
while rules/laws might exist for the good of the greatest number, there are times when
they will work against the interest of particular individuals. The issues are not always
clear-cut. For example, in Heinz’s dilemma, the protection of life is more important than
breaking the law against stealing.

• Stage 6. Universal Principles. People at this stage have developed their own set of moral
guidelines which may or may not fit the law. The principles apply to everyone.
E.g., human rights, justice, and equality. The person will be prepared to act to defend
these principles even if it means going against the rest of society in the process and
having to pay the consequences of disapproval and or imprisonment. Kohlberg doubted
few people reached this stage.
 LEARNING ACTIVITY

Below is an example of a situation that will require careful consideration on what course of action
to take. Read carefully and write down your arguments if supposed you are in that situations.
 
Situation 1
Your family is on an exclusive vacation on a private stretch of beach with no lifeguard. Your
daughter and your niece, both 7, are best friends and eager to get into the water. You caution
them to wait until the water calms some, but they defy you and sneak in anyway. You soon hear
screams of distress and find them both caught in a strong current. You are the only swimmer
strong enough to save them, but you can only save one at a time. Your niece is a very poor
swimmer and likely won’t make it much longer. Your daughter is a strong swimmer, but only has a
50% chance of holding on long enough for you to come back for her. Who would you save first and
Why? Discuss what would be the morally right action for those in Stages 1-6 of Kohlberg’s theory
in the given dilemma.
 TASK

Have you ever faced a situation in which you feel obliged to take two
or more actions (at a time), but then realized that it would not be
possible? In this part, you may write a moral dilemma based on your
experience. You may also incorporate some of the arguments that you
have used in the process.

Record yourself explaining the situations and the actions you have
taken. (video presentation)