Kohlberg

Moral Dilemmas

Heinz Dilemma

In a foreign country, a woman is near death from cancer. One drug might save her, a form of radium that a pharmacist in the same town has recently discovered. The pharmacist was charging $2000, ten times what the drug cost him to make. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone that he knew to borrow money, but he could only get about half of what it costs. He told the pharmacist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let Heinz make up the difference later. But the pharmacist said "No." Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug.

Should Heinz have done that? Why or why not?





The Ship

A passenger ship sank in the middle of the Atlantic. There was a great deal of panic on the ship as it became known that the ship was sinking. People were rushing into the lifeboats. One of the lifeboats was very over crowded. It became evident that the lifeboat would sink unless a number of people on it would get off. One of the passengers suggested that they take ropes and have people dragged behind the boat. However, it was winter and a person would be paralyzed and possibly die if he/she stayed in the water for more than ten minutes, People came up with many suggestions in order to avoid making the decision who would live and who would die. But nobody came up with a solution that would save all lives in the boat. After some suggestions had been discussed, two opinions emerged. Some people believed that they should leave themselves to chance. What will happen, will happen. They felt that it was wrong to make a decision to kill people. They might all die or they might all be saved. Another opinion was that they should draw lots as to who should stay in the boat and who should be thrown overboard.

Which of these two alternatives would you see as the more justified and why? Do you have any other suggestions? Do you think that it is justifiable to kill a few people in order to save many?




Plagiarism

There was one course in the university which was know to be very difficult. It was an elective course in which the professor assigned five papers during the semester. A senior took this course and wrote the first four papers. When the time came to hand in the fifth paper, he had many other things to do in order to graduate. One of his friends had taken the course two years previously and still had his papers. He asked his friend for one of the papers. He rewrote some parts of it and handed it in believing that the professor would never remember a paper that had been written that long ago, especially since so many students took the course. However, the professor recognized the paper and the name of the student who had originally written the paper.

What should the professor do? Suppose that the set punishment for plagiarism is expulsion from the university. Should the professor consider the fact that the student is a senior and about to graduate. Why or why not?





Return to Moral Development Outline