Publication Date

5-4-2020

Document Type

Essay

First Advisor

Daskal, Steven

Degree Name

B.A. (Bachelor of Arts)

Legacy Department

Department of Philosophy

Abstract

Moral dilemmas are often discussed in the philosophy of ethics. However, there is disagreement on what qualifies as a moral dilemma and what its implications are. A moral dilemma is thought to be a decision-making problem that involves conflicting obligations where the agent is required to satisfy one of the obligations but is unable to satisfy all of them. In this case, neither obligation is preferable as they each hold the same ethical implications. In a moral dilemma, a requirement may be found. However, there is disagreement among philosophers on whether matched requirements are a possibility. Because of this, I investigated the works of different philosophers to provide background information and a clear explanation of the different dilemmas in philosophy. The aim of my paper was to utilize this information and defend the possibility of matched requirements against those who are in opposition to the possibility. The primary reason for my belief in the possibility of matched requirements is due to the prevalence I find in our lives. Although the possibility of matched requirements is not definitive, the formulation of my argument is done through research of different philosophers, like Simon Blackburn and Peter Railton, while utilizing different scenarios and examples to relate the concept to our real-life.

Extent

15 pages

Language

eng

Publisher

Northern Illinois University

Rights Statement

In Copyright

Rights Statement 2

NIU theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from Huskie Commons for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without the written permission of the authors.

Media Type

Text

Download

Share

COinS