Ethics SSCI 0513 1st 2021-2022

Assessment 4.0
Name: CHEWEE DEANE S. MENDEZ Date: November 28, 2021
Program/Year/Section: BSME 2A GEC CEA 18

Directions: The following are Moral Dilemmas, these are situations in which a difficult choice has to be
made between two courses of action, either of which entails transgressing a moral principle. Answer as
honest as you can, explain your choice and justify why you think your course of action is morally
permissible.

1. THE TROLLEY PROBLEM (MRT VERSION)

Suppose you are at MRT Station and you notice that a train is on the loose and is about to hit the five
workers who are unaware of what is about to happen. You find yourself near the lever that will divert the
train on another track to save the five workers. However, you get caught of the sight of one unaware
worker who will be directly hit should you ever pull the lever. Will you save the five workers at the
expense of the life of one? Explain your answer and your considerations for making that choice.

Even if it meant killing one unaware worker, I would prefer to save the lives of five people. According to
the utilitarian concept, "everything" must act in the best interests of the largest number of people "Making
decisions isn't only about the pain they might create; it's also about taking the action that will yield the
best consequences for our decision."

2. THE TROLLEY PROBLEM WITH A TWIST

Ethics SSCI 0513 1st 2021-2022

You are on a footbridge over the trolley tracks and you can see that the one approaching the bridge is out
of control. On the track back of the bridge there are five people; the banks are so steep that they will not
be able to get off the track in time. You know that the only way to stop an out-of-control trolley is to drop
a very heavy weight into its path. But the available sufficiently heavy weight is a fat man, also watching
the trolley from the footbridge. You can shove the fat man onto the track in the path of the trolley, killing
the fat man; or you can refrain from doing so and thus, letting the five men die. Explain your answer and
your considerations for making that choice.

Pushing a fat guy onto a bridge is intentional murder in the footbridge scenario, but it can save the lives of
five men. We may also use utilitarianism to our advantage, sacrificing the fat man's life for the greater
good of five individuals.

3. SHOULD BATMAN KILL JOKER?

As the Caped Crusader, Batman is a hero or a vigilante for some, who possesses a moral compass. He
never kills his villains. One of his greatest opponent is Joker, who, no matter how many times Batman
beat him and confine him in the Arkham Asylum, he always finds ways to escape and kill as many people
as he could. As long as he is alive, he will never stop killing. Batman, for so many times had his chances
within his power to stop the Joker. He did everything but not killing him. Does Batman morally
responsible for the killings done by Joker? Is he “morally pure because he does not kill? Or morally dirty
because he refused to do what needs to be done?”(CrashCourse Philosophy,2016)

Because their battles harmed so many people, I believe Batman should be morally accountable for the
deaths perpetrated by Joker. Murder, on the other hand, is an unethical act as we know it. Although
killing one person is sufficient, killing a lot is excessive. Batman is accountable for this since he can stop
it, but he did not. Despite his reputation as a vigilante, Batman possesses a strong moral code and a
strong sense of justice. In my perspective, Batman should kill Joker; murdering a villain is fine, but
letting the villain kill a lot of people is not.