The Ethical Dilemma Of Underage Drinking In College Students

The dilemma which nearly all college students are faced with is the decision of whether to participate in underage drinking or to abstain from the occurrence. Regardless of the fact that some students encounter this situation more often than others, it is a universal issue for college students. When a student chooses to attend a party there are typically three options regarding alcohol consumption: to refrain from drinking, to drink a minimal or responsible amount, or to drink an excessive and potentially dangerous amount. According to The Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility, about 19% of students between the ages of twelve and twenty will choose either of the latter two options. Moral philosophers would argue the 19% of students

An agent choosing to abstain from drinking at a college party surrounded by alcohol and intoxicated people would be practicing the cardinal virtue of temperance which can be defined as moderation or self-restraint especially regarding eating and drinking. Aristotle directly addresses the significance of developing temperance when stating, “By abstaining from pleasures we become temperate, and it is when we have become so that we are most able to abstain from them” (Aristotle, II, 3). The student would also demonstrate the virtues of prudence, dignity, dependability and responsibility by collecting the self-control to make the wise, and potentially tough, decision to resist breaking the law by consuming alcohol. The telos for human beings is comprised of virtue, reason, and action. The decision not to drink uses reason to consider the virtue of temperance and act accordingly. On the contrary, choosing to drink excessively or repeatedly will limit one’s ability to develop the virtue of temperance or other virtues as a habit. Lack of habitual virtues restricts one’s ability to achieve a happy life. Failure to live happily and achieve Eudaimonia can be prevented by rejecting alcohol while under age according to Aristotle. This argument may not be persuasive to college students if they do not value or appreciate virtuous actions, particularly if not religious.

A common thread through the ideas of the three philosophers is that the declination of illegal alcohol usage preserves the happiness of both the agent and the community. Unfortunately, when most students are making their decision to reject alcohol, only drink in moderation, or drink in excess, they are not taking morality or ethics into account. Aristotle, Kant, and Mill each offer a convincing rationalization, however, Mill’s reasoning is most relevant to the mindset of underage college students. When students choose not to drink it is because they are the designated driver, have the fear losing self-control, or do not want to put the burden of responsibility on others. Students are typically concerned with the consequences or outcomes of drinking, identical to Mill. Not all college students have a sound understanding of virtues, especially is not religious, and some college students disregard the importance of the law which weakens the arguments of Aristotle and