Professional Ethics

Assignment 1
Moaaz Tameer Islam
321705
Quickly looking through all the people on ship, it’s clear that there are two pairs that would
be cruel to separate. So, either they both go or neither. The two pairs being the twins and the
newlywed couple. It also just so happens that they need to leave 4 people behind. A very
simplistic approach would be to leave both of these pairs behind.
One problem this solves, is that later on we wouldn’t have the headache of deciding whether
or not to split them up. That is, if they were given ‘priority’ over the other remaining people
on board, but only one spot was left on the lifeboat.
One other benefit of this approach would be that no one left behind would be ‘alone’. They
would spend these last moments of their life with one of, if not the closest, person in their life
to comfort them. This would greatly relieve the survivors’ guilt on the other 6 people.
Compare a married couple drowning to one veteran and a senior citizen drowning,
completely alone in the ocean, miles away from their loved ones. There’s a certain comfort
knowing that you died with the person you love the most, at least that’s what most of us like
to believe. Whether or not it reflects reality is not important, since we choose to believe it and
thus allow it to ease our conscious.

Albeit from an economical point of view, it would make sense to leave the oldest behind as
they statistically have the least to offer to society. The economy relies on the young adults to
work and return the value invested into them. Because from the government’s point of view,
you’ve lived a ‘tax-free’ life up to that point and you’re expected to ‘pay it back’ by working.
Senior citizens, who’ve retired, have already paid back their invested value and instead be
losing value if they’re being paid pension.
So, from a purely economic perspective, young adults have the highest value, followed by
children and lastly senior citizens. Based off of this, you would leave the veteran, senior
citizen and the twins.
It’s a logical thought process and an example of it can be seen by the Japanese society. After
a recent nuclear disaster in 2011, they needed people to do cleanup jobs in areas still affected
by the radiation. It was a suicide job, albeit a slow not instantaneous one. The retired seniors
of various towns volunteered to do the job. People who were comfortably living with
pensions and had no need to act out. However, they knew it was the logical decision, since
they had the statistically fewest years left to live. It’s a selfless act and the right decision to
do, I believe.

There are plenty of other viewpoints to understand this problem through, but the essence of it
boils down to the emotional and logical sides of the decision. Based off the circumstances
and the possible repercussions, sometimes we can ignore one side of the equation. Personally,
for this situation, I would try to appease both sides but would lean more towards the
emotional argument. Especially given the small scale of lives lost, you could even argue that
the financial loss can be mitigated, and you should pick the combination of people that would
be most accepted by society.

Going through each person and whether or not you should leave them behind:
a) You cannot leave a pregnant woman behind, because plenty of people would argue
that you’re killing two people not one.
b) The harsh reality is people wouldn’t be outraged over it. Rather accept it as the
lifeguard honoring their job. It’s the same with being the captain, as part of the ship’s
crew people can easily accept you ‘choosing’ to stay behind. The irony being that
having the lifeguard on the lifeboat could potentially be a lifesaver.
c) The married couple sits in the neutral zone. It would be a sad loss and maybe even
adapted to a movie after a few years given the way our society functions. I would
place them high on the ‘to save’ list but the fact that they come in a pair makes it
difficult to justify sometimes.
d) You would be wise not to leave the senior citizen with a full family behind. Think of
all the kids who lost their grandparent. They are a loved member of the society.
e) The professor is in a truer neutral situation. They carry little emotional appeal
relatively, whether they are left behind or not. And professors, even famous ones, are
quite replaceable in this day and age. Especially with the advent on free online
lectures.
 f) You cannot leave the twins behind as people would scream ‘they were just kids’ and
you would be painted as a monster.
g) I would be inclined to leave the veteran behind, especially if they suggest it. Since
they have the least value in bringing back out of all the people on the ship.
h) As captain, there’s this silent expectation of you sacrificing yourself. The idea of
dying with your ship, your last redeeming act given that it’s your fault (to whatever
degree) that they’re sinking.

The answer that would appease the most amount of people would be to leave the lifeguard,
professor, veteran and lastly myself, the captain. These are the people whose losses would
cause the least controversy.

But if I were the captain, then I would choose to leave behind the recently wed couple, the
lifeguard and the veteran. I would add the statement that I need to be on board, since I’m the
captain and familiar with what should be done. However, I would swap places with the
lifeguard right at the end, before anyone has time to debate the decision. The reason being
that the lifeguard is just as qualified as I am to lead the group. More importantly they’re best
suited to save someone who’s fallen overboard and drowning, given their lifeguard title.