Often it is Science Fiction or Fiction in general where our deepest ethical issues are explored.
The story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas, by Nebula-award-winning author Ursula Le Guinn, explores a hypothetical situation pitting Utilitarian and Deontological ethics against one another.
The story can be found here: The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas https://grantham-saas.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/pid-5648082-dt-asiobject-rid-15198541_1/xid-15198541_1
You can also get audio versions readily on YouTube.
Your assignment:
In 1-2 paragraphs explain the dilemma facing the citizens of Omelas in terms of Utilitarian vs Deontological ethical values. Who are the utilitarians? Who are the Deontologists? Explain why you say so.
In roughly 2-3 paragraphs create a work-related situation (explain the situation enough for me to understand the problem and the ramifications) that might involve a similar choice. How would you choose? Explain why.
Sample Answer
Sample Answer
Ethical Dilemma in “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”
In Ursula Le Guin’s “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,” the citizens of Omelas face a moral dilemma that pits Utilitarian and Deontological ethical values against each other. The utilitarians in Omelas believe in the greater good and justify the happiness and prosperity of the city’s inhabitants at the cost of the suffering of a single child kept in abhorrent conditions. They argue that the overall happiness of the majority justifies the sacrifice of this one child, adhering to Utilitarian principles. On the other hand, the individuals who walk away from Omelas represent the Deontologists who adhere to moral principles and believe that certain actions, such as causing harm to an innocent individual, are inherently wrong, regardless of the potential benefits to society as a whole.
Work-Related Ethical Situation
In a work-related scenario, imagine a pharmaceutical company facing a dilemma regarding the release of a life-saving medication. The medication has the potential to cure a rare and deadly disease that affects a small population of patients. However, during the testing phase, it is discovered that a certain percentage of individuals may experience severe side effects, leading to long-term health complications or even death. The utilitarian approach would prioritize the greater good by releasing the medication to save the lives of those suffering from the disease, accepting the potential harm to a small number of individuals as a necessary sacrifice for the benefit of the majority. On the other hand, a deontological perspective would emphasize the moral duty to do no harm, arguing that releasing a medication with known harmful side effects goes against ethical principles, regardless of the potential benefits. In this situation, I would lean towards a deontological approach, prioritizing the principle of nonmaleficence and advocating for further research and development to mitigate the risks associated with the medication before its release. While the utilitarian perspective focuses on maximizing overall utility, the deontological approach places emphasis on upholding ethical duties and respecting individual rights, even in challenging ethical dilemmas.
