PULIPATI SAI KIRAN KUMAR (DM251062)

ETHICS - REFLECTION PAPER

Introduction: Navigating Ethical Dilemmas in Zombieland:
As the governing body of Zombieland (the name we assigned to our country), our journey
through the simulation provided an array of ethical dilemmas that demanded careful
consideration and strategic decision-making. Each scenario presented a unique opportunity to
strike a delicate balance between communal welfare, individual rights, and the integrity of our
nation. The initial discussion among the group is fun and most of us stuck to single option but
as the simulation progresses a variety of thoughts came up that led a series of debates to get to
a common answer.
Prioritizing Public Health and Safety: Prohibition of the Pilgrimage:
One of the guiding concepts for our decisions was a collectivistic approach that prioritized the
well-being of our society. This approach was reflected in our decision to prohibit the pilgrimage
to the Faith Tower. Regardless of the pilgrimage's cultural significance, we made the decision
to prioritize public health and safety before individual religious rituals. With a population of
more than 72 million (the population figure that was assigned to our country), the potential
threats posed by an influx of pilgrims, especially during a pandemic, were too great to ignore.
By enforcing the restriction, we hoped to slow the spread of infection and safeguard the public.
Subsidizing Healthcare: Ethical Considerations of the Anti-Zombie "Pseudo Vaccine":
Similarly, our decision to subsidize the alleged Anti-Zombie "pseudo vaccine" reflected our
commitment to safeguarding public health. While the effectiveness of the vaccine was
questionable, the potential benefits of reduced infection rates exceeded the risks. By
subsidizing drugs, we hoped to provide affordable healthcare to all citizens, regardless of
socioeconomic status. However, it is critical to consider the ethical consequences of supporting
a medicine with unknown efficacy. While our intentions were to preserve public health, there
is a risk of spreading misinformation and false hope among the population.
Transparency and Accountability: Addressing Flawed Blood Tests:
Despite our common emphasis on societal well-being, we recognized the value of individual
rights and liberty. Our choice to go public about the flawed blood tests demonstrates our
commitment to transparency and accountability. Considering evidence from an informant, it
was critical to address the matter openly and honestly, choosing our citizens' safety and trust
before corporate interests. We hoped that by openly acknowledging the error, we would be able
to undertake corrective efforts and restore trust in the healthcare system.
Humanitarian Approach to Crisis Management: Nonviolent Tactics in Dealing with Infected
Civilians:
Furthermore, our decision not to launch a military assault on infected civilians demonstrates
our respect for individual dignity and human rights. While the temptation to use force to prevent
the spread of infection was strong as per our groups discussion as we know that launching an
attack might reduce the spread of the infection, after series of discussions we realized the ethical
responsibility to prioritize nonviolent tactics whenever possible. Instead, we decided to

1
 PULIPATI SAI KIRAN KUMAR (DM251062)

strengthen military participation to aid with medical evacuations, emphasizing a humanitarian

and compassionate approach to crisis management.
Balancing Terminal and Instrumental Values: Influences on Decision-Making:
Our decision-making was influenced by a complicated interaction between terminal and
instrumental values. Socially, we prioritized principles like public health, safety, and societal
stability, acknowledging our role as guardians of the common good. Personally, we worked to
embrace ideals like integrity, transparency, and compassion, knowing that our actions as
leaders would shape governance and civic involvement.
Ethical Theories in Action: Utilizing Consequentialist, Non-Consequentialist, and Normative
Ethics:
In dealing the ethical dilemmas presented to us, we relied on a variety of ethical theories to
inform our conclusions. Consequentialist ethics pushed us to think about the possible
consequences of our acts, considering the benefits and risks to society. Non-consequentialist
ethics reminded us of the inherent importance of certain moral values and rights, urging us to
maintain honesty, justice, and fairness regardless of the outcome. Normative ethics offers a
framework for negotiating the difficulties of governance, enabling us to uphold ethical norms
and standards while balancing opposing interests.
Acknowledging Imperfections: Dealing with Ethical Ambiguities and Moral Myopia:
Despite our best attempts, some of our acts may have appeared hypocritical or short-sighted
leading to moral myopia. For example, our decision to run illegal software in scenario four
prompted ethical questions about undermining the rule of law in the name of convenience.
While our objective was to collect valuable data for public health purposes, the methods we
used may have undercut the principles we hoped to promote. It is critical to acknowledge the
inherent conflict between expediency and ethical integrity, especially during times of crisis.
Conclusion: Ethical Leadership in a Complex Scenarios:
Overall, our experience navigating these scenarios demonstrated the complexities and
challenges of ethical leadership in governance. By emphasizing transparency, accountability,
and compassion, we aimed to defend our country's values and principles while navigating the
complicated moral landscape of government. As we face new challenges and crises, we remain
dedicated to ethical leadership based on the belief that integrity, resilience, and social well-
being are the building blocks of a just and thriving society.

----------------X----------------