Moral Dilemm Right Vs Right Essay

Director and actor Spike Lee presents his "truth" about race relations in his movie Do the Right Thing. The film exhibits the spectacle of black discrimination and racial altercations. Through serious, angry, and loud sounds, Lee stays true to the ethnicity of his characters, all of which reflect their own individualism. Lee uses insulting diction and intense scenes to show how severe racism can lead to violence.

This paper explores the things that have influenced my moral worldview. It includes insight on what I consider when making decisions. I discuss who and what I look too when deciding my morals and what I consider to be right and wrong.

Actions and inactions all have moral implications; they are either right or wrong depending on the individual and what s/he believes or feels is right or wrong. Each person’s conduct can and does have implications and ramifications. For every action there is an equal and/or opposite reaction not only for the average person but also for professionals; especially in the area of law enforcement, criminal justice, and criminal procedure. Just discussed is known as moral philosophy.

     Spike Lee’s movie Do the Right Thing is an excellent portrayal of what life was and is most certainly like in some areas of New York City and across the United States of America.

In 1975 the board of directors for a company that makes transistors were presented with an ethical dilemma. They were the last transistor company that was selling to a pacemaker company as a result of other companies backing out of the business due to the failure of some pacemakers leading to deaths of some of those who used them. At the time, pacemaker technology was extremely new and had yet to develop into the ground breaking product that it is today. The ethical dilemma presented to the board was whether or not to continue to sell their transistor to the company and risk the negative connotation and ultimately the loss of shareholders in the company, associated with the deaths that occurred (Shanks, 1996). This

Every day we are faced with certain situations that challenge us with how to act in an ethical manner. It can be human nature to feel unsure or conflicted with the correct moral choice. Some can say that one should know how to handle such dilemmas and others may say that there should be a reference of some sort to help guide through such conflicts. Sometimes we know the answers and sometimes we are unsure of how to handle certain situations. Most times we go through life wondering what we should do. As I become further educated on the different theories of ethics, I believe there are answers that are available in guiding one through an ethical dilemma and or judgment. I will discuss Vincent Ruggiero’s three basic criteria, Robert Kegan’s order of consciousness, the three schools of ethics and the correlation between all three.

case of Tom Robinson, whose color of his skin lands him in the middle of an unfortunate event.

For a given ethical dilemma, there is usually a dominant pair. Frequently, more than one must be considered, and sometimes all four. But, as Kidder

Sometimes agents are forced to choose between the morally right action and that which would be in their self-interest. When conflicting demands are imposed on a person, how are they to determine the best course of action? In “The Ring of Gyges: Overridingness and the Unity of Reason,” David Copp argues that neither morality nor self-interest overrides the other, and so there is “never an overall verdict as to which action is required simpliciter” in “conflict cases” (86-87). Furthermore, he denies that there is any normatively supreme standard (87). This paper will first expound Copp 's definitions of normative properties and standards. Secondly, his account of overridingness and his arguments against the supremacy of the standards of morality, self-interest, and personal excellence will be explicated. Finally, his claim that any standard which is posited as the answer to the overridingness question will result in circularity will be analyzed. It will be argued that his definition of an “authoritative” standard forces him to either accept that a normatively supreme standard does exist or, otherwise, that there is no non-arbitrary way to attribute normative significance to any standards at all.

This paper will compare the usefulness of character-based and consequence-based approaches in making moral decisions. In a character-based approach, the consideration of the moral agent is central in making decisions, and actions are made in order to reflect and strengthen good character. In a consequence-based approach, the consideration of the outcome is central in making moral decisions, and actions are judged based on the outcome. Usefulness will be defined in terms of three aspects: consistency, convenience and assurance, with assurance being defined as the confidence that the decision made is correct. Through the comparison of the two approaches, it becomes clear that a character-based approach is more useful in making a decision.

An ethical dilemma is an incident that causes us to question how we should react based on our beliefs. A decision needs to be made between right and wrong. I have experienced many ethical dilemmas in my lifetime, so I know that there is no such thing as an ethical dilemma that only affects one person. I also know that some ethical dilemmas are easier to resolve than others are. The easy ones are the ones in which we can make decisions on the spot. For example, if a cashier gives me too much change, I can immediately make a decision to either return the money or keep it. Based on Kant’s, categorical imperative there are two criteria for determining moral right and wrong. First, there is universalizability, which states, “the person’s

The weather is sizzling hot and tensions are slowly coming to a boil in this Bedford-Stuyvesant Brooklyn neighborhood. Slowly but surely we see the heat melt away the barriers that were keeping anger from rising to the surface. The Blacks and the Hispanics own the streets the Koreans own the corner store and of course the Italians own the pizzeria, the Cops who happen to be all Caucasian, prowl the streets inside out, looking for anyone to harass. Toes are then stepped on and apologies are not made. Spike Lee creates the perfect set-up for a modern day in Bed-Stuyvesant. Without fail Spike Lee is transformed into an anthropologist. Spike Lee’s goal is to allow viewers to glimpse into the lives of real people and into a neighborhood they

Banks (2006) claims that dilemmas occur when individuals encounter two equally unwelcoming alternatives for a choice, potentially involving a conflict of moral values. The assumption is both judgements can be affirmed; it constitutes situations in which individuals need to make choices given different equally compelling moral options. However, rarely are ethical choices simple; most decisions are restricted and invokes internal conflict as dilemmas highlight the differences and those conflicts when deciding on a course of action.

In James Rachels’ book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, he expresses ideas within the concluding chapter, “What Would a Satisfactory Moral Theory be like?” that lay an silhouette of every moral approach we have discussed so far and compounding it into a final discussion with a couple of final contentions towards a comprehensive understanding of morality and the approaches we can make as moral guides to make decisions that are virtuous for each class without exception. Rachels’ gives thoughtful perspective on all subjects that we have learned about and makes final accumulations for the way we can decide to use these for our own benefit. While then expressing the virtues we must value for ourselves to have a best plan, and the ways our choices can help others in a positive aspect.

Everyday we are tested as individuals to make the right choice. How we view ourselves as individuals and how others view us are directly correlated to our moral decision-making. But morals are somewhat misleading. What might be a wrong decision for one person might be a solution to another. So how do we define morals? Do we follow Gods’ moral rules because to do so would increase out likelihood of obtaining salvation in the afterlife? Or is it simpler than that. Is God going to deny our entrance into heaven because we have run a stop sign here and there? No. I believe our moral values are much simpler than that. I believe that our moral decision-making comes from our upbringing of what is right or wrong. Our parents and