An ethical
dilemma is a complex situation that often involves an apparent mental
conflict between moral
imperatives, in which to obey one would result in transgressing another.
This is also called an ethical paradox since in moral philosophy,
paradox often plays a central role in ethics debates. Ethical dilemmas are often
cited in an attempt to refute an ethical system or moral code, as well as the
worldview that encompasses or grows from it.
The terconduct, law and
other similar concepts; sankat implies a trouble or problem
Responses to the arguments
These arguments can be
refuted in various ways, for example by showing that the claimed ethical dilemma
is only apparent and does not really exist (thus is not a paradox logically), or that the solution to the ethical
dilemma involves choosing the greater good and lesser evil (as discussed in value theory), or that the
whole framing of the problem is omitting
creative alternatives (as in peacemaking), or (more recently) that situational
ethics or situated
ethics must apply because the case cannot be removed from context and still
be understood. See also
case-based
reasoning on this process. An alternative to situational ethics is graded
absolutism.
Perhaps the most
commonly cited ethical conflict is that between an imperative or injunction not
to steal and one to care for a family that you cannot afford to feed without
stolen money. Debates on this often revolve around the availability of alternate
means of income or support such as a social safety net, charity, etc. The debate is in its
starkest form when framed as stealing food. In Les Misérables Jean Valjean does this
and is relentlessly pursued. Under an ethical system in which stealing is always
wrong and letting one's family die from starvation is always wrong, a person in
such a situation would be forced to commit one wrong to avoid committing
another, and be in constant conflict with those whose view of the acts
varied.
However, there are few
legitimate ethical systems in which stealing is more wrong than letting one's
family die. Ethical systems do in fact allow for, and sometimes outline,
tradeoffs or priorities in decisions. Some[citation
needed] have suggested that international law requires this kind of
mechanism to resolve whether World Trade Organization (WTO) or Kyoto Protocol takes
precedence in deciding whether a WTO notification is valid. That is, whether
nations may use trade mechanisms to complain about climate change measures.
According to some
philosophers and sociologists, e.g. Karl Marx, it is the different life experience of
people and the different exposure of them and their families in these roles (the
rich constantly robbing the poor, the poor in a position of constant begging and
subordination) that creates social class differences. In other words, ethical
dilemmas can become political and economic factions that engage in long term
recurring struggles. See conflict theory and left-wing
politics versus right-wing politics.
Design of a voting system, other electoral reform, a
criminal justice
system, or other high-stakes adversarial process for dispute
resolution will almost always reflect the deep persistent struggles
involved. However, no amount of good intent and hard work can undo a bad role
structure:
Roles within structures[edit]
Where a structural
conflict is involved, dilemmas will very often recur. A trivial example is
working with a bad operating system whose error messages do not
match the problems the user perceives. Each such error presents the user with a
dilemma: reboot the machine and continue working at one's
employment or spend time trying to reproduce the problem for the benefit of the
developer of the operating system.
See total
quality management for more on addressing this kind of failure and governance on how many ethical and
structural conflicts can be resolved with appropriate supervisory
mechanisms.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기