The issue here is a situation, a lifeboat dilemma. You are afloat in a lifeboat with too many people during a storm and you have a gun and plenty of ammo. You have FOUR options here after.
1) Wait for the storm to drown everyone.
2) Kill yourself to avoid the decision.
3) Kill everyone before the storm arrives.
4) Kill some to save some before the storm arrives.
IS IT BETTER TO DIE OR LIVE THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR DECISION??
Most people go for option 4. Here, we shall discuss all the four options and then conclude that the fourth option is the most ethically correct option.
Lets analyze this situation by stepping into the shoes of the man with the gun.
Taking option 1, I had the instrument for saving the people. Well, some of the people. But, I could’ve. It is somewhat ethically correct to choose option 1. I am not above all the people who are onboard. I do not have the
…show more content…
It says that I kill myself to avoid taking the decision. But then, that would be a cowardly thing to do. I had the chance to save lives. I didn’t. Instead, I kill myself. Just because I didn’t have the guts to kill someone else, I kill myself. This is ethically correct. In fact, this is more ethical than option 1. Choosing option one killed everyone on the boat along with yourself. Choosing option 2 might save some people. But, we wouldn’t know what happens after I kill myself. Do all the people on the boat die? Do they kill some more and save some lives? We wouldn’t know.
Lets have a look at option 3. I kill everyone on the ship. That would be the most unethical thing to do. I don’t save anyone. I kill everyone and I save myself. A sign of utter selfishness. This would also indicate that I think of myself above everyone else. So, this would be a very wrong thing to do. So, we can say that option 3 is the not at all an ethically correct choice.
So, till now, the order of options from least ethical to most ethical would be: OPTION 3, OPTION 1, OPTION