DILEMMA = What would you do?

[NOV]

[html:dce30fd2f9]
http://www.rajeshsetty.com/wp-content/uploads/dilemma.jpg
[/html:dce30fd2f9]


What would you do in a particular situation? How would you react? Why did you choose a particular way?
How different would it be from someone else's reaction?

[NOV]

SCENARIO - You are a train driver. You are driving along a track and see a group of boys playing on the track.

There is an alternative unused track that you can take. But there is ONE boy playing on the track.

You have to make a split decision. Would you remain on the track or take the unused track?

Why?

[Thirumaran]

train track ellaam namma ishtathukku maaththa mudiyaathu :lol2:

[NOV]

its not a trick question TM :roll:

[Benny Lava]

Stick to the original track. Anyways the boys have to disperse seeing the train. Even if we go on the other track we hope for the boy to get off the track, but the unused track is an unknown factor, putting the lives of the train passengers at risk :P

[Thirumaran]

its not a trick question TM :roll:

then what BL said is perfect.

[NOV]

True Emu.

on the one hand we have the boys doing something illegal
on the other hand we have the solitary boy who is not breaking the rules

but doesnt community good (group of boys) take precedence over individual good?

[sathya_1979]

If 10 break the rules and 1 stick to it, who should face the consequences of breaking? 10 or 1?

[NOV]

if a decision will kill 10 instead of 1, what would be the choice?

[SoftSword]

the tricky question here would be, what if all the boys there are innocent and not doing any illegal tasks...
and if there is a risk for the train if they try to switch the task?

[Benny Lava]

If 10 break the rules and 1 stick to it, who should face the consequences of breaking? 10 or 1?

Sathya, it is not ours to decide whose life is more important.. of course in such a situation we will have to go with one option, the end result can only be blamed on circumstance. It is never justifiable.

[Benny Lava]

Here is another dilemma, a quite popular one. Those who have read about this please do not answer. The answer is not as important as the moral justification you give for it. Please do not Google this if you have not heard this before.


"In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug-for his wife. Should the husband have done that?"

[SoftSword]

Here is another dilemma, a quite popular one. Those who have read about this please do not answer. The answer is not as important as the moral justification you give for it. Please do not Google this if you have not heard this before.


"In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug-for his wife. Should the husband have done that?"
yes, he did the right.

[Benny Lava]

No SS, he has not done anything. Enna pannanum nu sollunga. More importantly, elaborate why you think it is the right thing to do.

[SoftSword]

he could do anything to get the medicine from the medical shop owner... provided the medic guy gets a fair profit... maybe by taking those 1000 bucks

[app_engine]

This is not a literal "dilemma" but what would you suggest to the police to resolve this peculiar issue :

http://www.dinamalar.com/News_Detail.asp?Id=145220



ஆலப்புழா : கேரள அரசு பஸ்சில், பயணியிடம், "லபக்'கிய தங்க சங்கிலியை கொள்ளையன் விழுங்கியதால், அவனிடம் இருந்து அதை வெளியே எடுக்க முடியாமல், போலீசார் தவித்து வருகின்றனர்.
...
அவரை பிடித்த சக பயணிகள், அருகே உள்ள வண்டானம் மருத்துவக் கல்லூரி மருத்துவமனைக்கு அழைத்து சென்றனர். எக்ஸ்-ரே எடுத்துப் பார்த்த டாக்டர்கள், அவரது வயிற்றில் சங்கிலி இருப்பதை உறுதி செய்தனர்.

இதுகுறித்து தகவல் கிடைத்ததும் அம்பலபுழா போலீசார், இரு இளைஞர்களையும் கைது செய்து, போலீஸ் நிலையத்திற்கு கொண்டு சென்றனர். அங்கு அவர்களை இரு நாட்கள் வைத்து, கண்காணித்து வருகின்றனர். இருப்பினும், தங்க சங்கிலியை விழுங்கிய நபரின் வயிற்றில் இருந்து அது வெளியே வரவில்லை. இதையடுத்து போலீசார், அவருக்கு நிறைய வாழைப்பழங்களை சாப்பிட கொடுத்தனர். அதை சாப்பிட்டும், வயிற்றில் இருந்து சங்கிலி வெளியே வரவில்லை. தொடர்ந்து அவருக்கு, எனிமா சிகிச்சை அளிக்கப்பட்டது. அதிலும், சங்கிலி வெளியே வராததால், என்ன செய்வது என தெரியாமல் போலீசார் தவித்து வருகின்றனர்.


:lol:

[NOV]

Here is another dilemma, a quite popular one. Those who have read about this please do not answer. The answer is not as important as the moral justification you give for it. Please do not Google this if you have not heard this before.


"In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug-for his wife. Should the husband have done that?"There will be anarchy if ppl break regular laws to achieve their ends.

Best is for the husband to highlight the case thru newspapers and TV. Ppl may chip in or the seller might be shamed to lower his price.

[NOV]

app - what a disgusting dilemma. :rant:
enema won't help. give him some laxative. :roll:

[Benny Lava]

There will be anarchy if ppl break regular laws to achieve their ends.

Best is for the husband to highlight the case thru newspapers and TV. Ppl may chip in or the seller might be shamed to lower his price.

Good answer NOV. More importantly a valid justification for your answer. As I told before, here the answer is not as important as the thought that leads to it. This dilemma was first used by Kohlberg to explain different stages of moral development of a person. He postulated that every person goes through six stages of moral development which guides his sense of judgment.

1. As a kid we are driven by fear & punishment. Sense of right or wrong depends on whether the action is punishable or not. A person in this stage might probably say he should not break into the store because he will get jailed for his act (Note that it is still possible for a child to justify theft saying he asked it first, he has not stolen something big). This can give rise to conviction that suffering victims are guilty in proportion to their suffering.

2. Second stage is self-interest driven where an action is deemed best depending on whether it will be of benefit to oneself or not. A growing up kid is normally encouraged to behave well by rewarding it with chocolates and gifts for good behavior. Consequently his sense of right or wrong is driven by one's own interest. One might say Heinz should steal because he will be happy to see his wife alive or the same person might say Heinz shouldn't steal because he won't be happy in Jail. (There is a funny example in one Big Bang Theory episode where Sheldon tries to correct Penny's behavior by rewarding her with Chocolates.)

3. Third stage is commonly observed in teens. They have an idea of society, kinship and are obsessed with filling social roles. They want to be the nice boy and nice girl and their moral judgement is based on what is socially acceptable. It is important for them that the morality that they believe in should be upheld by the entire community.
It can be compared with the Kural where the right deed is defined as "Ulagathodu otta ozhugal"

4. Stage four is Social order driven with an urge to obey social laws and decorums. There is an understanding beyond the oneself and immediate kinship in realizing the importance of maintaining a functioning society. This stage is the least egocentric so far realizing that society must learn to transcend individual needs. By extrapolation it can be said that this mode of reasoning also calls for a tinge of Fundamentalism.

5. Stage five begins to question these laws, disregarding their absoluteness. The reasoning steps back from rigid rules, trying to reconsider the rights and values for which the laws were established in the first place. In that retrospect, a Stage five person might think it is the drugists' right to determine the price of his product or he might say the rules of the society are less absolute compared to the wife's right to live.

6. Stage Six is more detached from cocial rules or rights, rather relying on abstract reasoning and categorically derived. Kohlberg's definition of stage six has a tinge of Nihilism. Whether this is the ultimate level of moral reasoning? We would never know unless we are capable of thinking beyond its limitations.

I personally do not think that all of our reasoning belongs distinctively to one of these groups. We tend to alternate between different levels of thinking (lack of consistency in reasoning), mostly to suit our preconceived notions and prejudice.

[SoftSword]

BL :clap:
where did u get this composition from?

[Benny Lava]

BL :clap:
where did u get this composition from?

SS, there are lots of articles on Kohlberg's six stages of moral development available on the net. The below one is a good read:

http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/Kohlberg%27s%20Stages%20of%20Moral%20Development.h tm

But Kohlberg's theory is not the only theory on moral development. For instance some people felt that Kohlberg's model doesn't explain the development of a girl's sense of morality well. Perhaps because it bothered them that as per his model whole of womankind seems to be stuck in stage 3 :P (Just kidding :yessir: ). So they went on to develop alternate models.

Whatever be the model, it is insightful and thought provoking to understand the basis of these moral judgments. This understanding will help us to gauge a moral stance more subjectively.

[NOV]

Deep.... very deep...!

[NOV]

If you have heard of this, please do not attempt....


You are driving with loads of things in your boot and the back seat. Its raining heavily, as you pull at a bus stop. There are three people waiting for the very infrequent bus:

a. A friend that you owe your life, who is now extremely late for a job interview that is going to give him a break in llife.

b. A very pregnant lady who looks like she is going to deliver any time.

c. The most beautiful girl you have ever seen, who you would like to know better.

Since there is space for only ONE person in your car, who would you give lift to?

[SoftSword]

If you have heard of this, please do not attempt....


You are driving with loads of things in your boot and the back seat. Its raining heavily, as you pull at a bus stop. There are three people waiting for the very infrequent bus:

a. A friend that you owe your life, who is now extremely late for a job interview that is going to give him a break in llife.

b. A very pregnant lady who looks like she is going to deliver any time.

c. The most beautiful girl you have ever seen, who you would like to know better.

Since there is space for only ONE person in your car, who would you give lift to?

dont think is a dilemma question....
i would give my car to my friend and ask him to drop the lady in the nearest hospital and go for interview...
and i will hav to push my time with the gal in the bus stop :(

[prashanth12]

If you have to follow the rules of the question, the pregnant lady. I did not consider this a difficult choice...

[NOV]

SoftSword :evil:

prashanth, then what happens to your friend? he will commit suicide if he doesnt get the job...

[SoftSword]

SoftSword :evil:

prashanth, then what happens to your friend? he will commit suicide if he doesnt get the job...

:roll: :?:

[NOV]

If you have heard of this, please do not attempt.... :x :x :x

[SoftSword]

If you have heard of this, please do not attempt.... :x :x :x

i hav not.

[NOV]

yeah, yeah, and I am Preetika's boyfriend. :roll: :hammer:

[SoftSword]

who is preethika?
the gal standing in the bus stop?

[SoftSword]

nov, first of all this is not a tough question as u thought..
secondly, this is a lateral thinking question and has nothing to do with dilemma..

[app_engine]

[tscii:6c48ca4489]What can a newly-wed woman do if her "hubby" tells like this? (http://www.dinakaran.com/highdetail.aspx?id=24123&id1=13)



ஒரிசா மாநிலம் ரூர்கேலா அருகே கோல்கர் பகுதியை சேர்ந்தவர் மினாட்டி கதுவா. இவர் சீதாகாந்த் ரவுட்ரே என்பவரை கடந்த 6 மாதங்களுக்கு முன்பு கோயிலில் திருமணம் செய்து கொண்டார். அதை சார் பதிவாளர் அலுவலகத்திலும் பதிவு செய்து கொண்டனர். திருமண கனவில் இருந்த மினாட்டிக்கு அதன்பின் ஏமாற்றம்தான். கணவன் அவரிடம் நெருக்கமாக பழகவில்லை. ஏன் என்று கேட்டதற்கு, ‘ஆறு மாதங்கள் கடும் விரதம் இருக்கிறேன். அதுவரை பொறுத்திரு. அதன்பின் புரி ஜகன்னாதர் கோயிலில் சிறப்பு பூஜைகள் செய்துவிட்டு முதலிரவு கொண்டாடலாம்’ என்று கூறியிருக்கிறார்.


[/tscii:6c48ca4489]

[Ramona]

It is a dilemma. A simple dictionary would define dilemma as "a situation requiring a choice between equally undesirable alternatives" and I would add; and equally desirable choices. The first consideration for choice in the first case scenario put forward by Nov, would be the obvious; what you can see; the number, since nothing is known about these individuals.

[NOV]

:ty: Ramona.

a-p, ennanga idhu? :roll:

[NOV]

Say you are responsible for hiring in your company. You have a friend who is qualified for the job, but there is someone else even more qualified. Would it be fair to offer the job to your friend over the more qualified stranger?

[Ramona]

May I add, there is no right or wrong choice in a dilemma. The only thing is, the choice made has to be justified by conscience. A reason is still expected to be given.

The diffculty in some instances of a choice made out of a dilemma, is to show or convince others that there was a dilemma to begin with.

[prashanth12]

Re: Hiring friend: Obviously not....

[Ramona]

If the requirement is to be qualified for the job, then even though there is a "more qualified person", you may be justified in giving the job to your friend who has met that requirement. You may not need a more qualified person for that position.

Hiring a friend could also lead to potential conflict down the road. There are certain rules in employment standards that may not allow the hiring of a friend due to such potential conflict arising.

Not only that, it may not be in the friend's best interest to work for you. He would have trouble establishing that he has a serious employment contract with you (even though he signed one) for the purposes of payment or any employment benefits.

[SoftSword]

i would choose my friend for the job. no dilemma.

[Ramona]

i would choose my friend for the job. no dilemma.

The easier way out of dilemma is not always realistic.

[NOV]

no dilemma.or no conscience? :P