h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Yeah, but treat *who*? And what about when there's a conflict?



Take for example: the choice between recalling a car that is blowing up one person every six months but will lead to massive layoffs and job loss, not to mention impoverishing the stockholders?

Moral dillemas aren't called dillemas cause morality is so easy to define.

Letsay for example person A says you're obligated to recall the cars based on the fact that it isn't right to kill other people for money.

Then person B comes along and gives some theory on universal values of right wrong for why the cars shouldn't be recalled. Person B then points out that person A's reasoning falls into Kohlberg's Conventional stage of moral development, while person B's falls into the Postconventional, making it a more advanced form of moral reasoning, and therefore more moral. If person B then went on to totally dismiss person A's stance as immature, wouldn't you say person B is enforcing his or her ideas of morality on others?

Logical disconnect here: the fact that the postconventional justification is fresher doesn't make it better.

I might start ranting about 'cocaine decisions' sometime soon.

If the Bucks are worth more than human life, as our government demonstrates to us on a daily basis, then by all means pretend the deaths are not happening.

Exit morality. That's strictly a bottom-line-profit decision. No moral dilemma at all.

B***** the stockholders, I say!

What Xantief said. The alternative where you keep silent is unequivocally immoral. Profit is not a factor in ethics, be they ever so postconventional. Just sayin'.

Leo,

That's an easy one...car recalls don't create layoffs, they create additional useful work for mechanics and factory workers...as for the stockholders...they bet on the wrong horse and they will also be even more impoverished when a jury learns of managements callous attitude...further, life is sloppy and non one can predict casualties of "only" one every six months...So fix it..no dilemna..

However, I take your point about ethical conflicts, especially in an academic context...why else would there be any discussion about things like stem cell research, abortion or the use of Atomic weapons in 1945...

Remember the biblical two headed baby? The question came up about whether the child should receive a double share of its father's estate. King Solomon thought about this and suggested pouring boiling water on one head. If the other head screamed, he felt that the baby should only receive one share...how would you resolve this dilemna?

Dear Leo,

Thank you for introducing me to Lawrence Kohlberg. I am sorry but my knowledge of moral development had stopped at Piaget!!. I have googled a short explication of his work and once my aged brain has managed to absorb his arguments, hopefully you will be able to enlighten me as to any problems I have; that is if you have time.

I hope that you find rewarding work very soon.

Sincerely,

Christiane AR1

Phred,

Where on earth do I find the two-headed baby argument?

Christiane AR1

The two-headed 'baby' isn't biblical.
It's part of the Asmodei/Solomon set of Jewish legends, told in the Talmud.

From 'Legends of the Jews':
Asmodeus stuck his finger in the ground, and up came a double-headed man...he remained on earth, took unto himself a wife, and begot seven sons, one of whom resembled his father in having two heads. When the Cainite died, a dispute broke out among his descendants as to how the property was to be divided. The double-headed son claimed two portions... When the sons of the Cainite again came before Solomon, he poured hot water on one of the heads of the double-headed monster, whereupon both heads flinched, and both mouths cried out: "We are dying, we are dying! We are but one, not two." Solomon decided that the double-headed son was after all only a single being.

Try this either:
http://ohr.edu/ask/ask104.htm

It's not nice to pour boiling water on someone's head, even if they have an extra one. And calling someone a monster, just because of an unusual physical characteristic is not politically correct...just goes to show how much more ethically evolved we are than our ancestors...

I haven't read Kohlberg: I got my philosophy degree back about the time of the Ark. But I'm wary of anyone who says his method of ethical 'reasoning' is more advanced. In the first place, reason doesn't have primacy in ethics because it's based on imperatives, "oughts", not facts. In the second place, I thought we had only recently fought free of thinking in terms of advanced/primitive in law and belief systems.

But maybe Kohlberg isn't a contemporary writer, as I'm presuming, so I shouldn't go haring off to false conclusions.

Would the postconventional argument have to be adjusted if the two-headed bloke got blown up in his car?

Thank you Pinneped,

You have given me a very useful link.

AlsoRan1

Well written and said Phred.

Pinneped has given me a link which I hope to be able to follow. It seemed very interesting.

Are you back in Sarasotsa now for a while? Lots of tennis. I am obliged to try and kill the mould in my house before it stretches it;s evil tentacles towards me. So I am going to have a busy time.


I read the campfire thread and although I did not understand much, was intrigued at all the guests you had!!!!!!!!
Perhaps one day I might be able to pay a visit, or two , or even three!!. Who knows? Knowledge is growth, and campfires are something which have been sadly neglected in my intellectual development.

Regards

Christiane AR1

Hi Christiane,

We will be in Sarasota until the end of April...it's a very lazy place..

Tennis, reading by the pool, a long nap, more tennis, hotub, more reading, a bar-b-que.

Mrs. Phred won again, 6-2, 6-0, 6-1, 6-0...

I hope to start work polishing rocks for my grandchildren today...

I hope you can get the mold problem under control...

Did you notice that Fedderer lost yesterday at Indian Wells?

Phred

My goodness, Mrs. Phred does have some superb wins!!.

Enjoy the jewellery making. Do you use semi precious stones - silver - gold or what as the basis/framework.?

Lots of interest and phone calls about the mold problem. I am still sleeping in a chair which I am finding more and more uncomfortable. Tomrrrow the dentist in London. And sadly is is going to be unpleasant as I have an infection in a tooth which he is trying to save. Have been on anti biotics . Oh goodness why did I ever agree to this!!.

I saw that Federer lost. It must have been a shock to him. Perhaps it was jet lag? He is such a marvellous player with such a wonderful temperament. But I enjoy all of them really - though some more than others!!

Have you been to Flushing Meadows? I have been to Wimbledon - in the days of the Australian onsliaught and also a marvellous tennis player from the Balkans whose name escapes me for the moment. What an experience. That was in the 60 - forty years ago!!. My goodness.

Kind regards and enjoy your lovely idyllic life.

Christiane AR1

All I meant to do was open a can of worms. Sheesh. That wasn't my point. My point was that you can have three different people approach an ethical dillema and they can come up with three different ways to deal with it, and each one can be totally convinced they are right - and maybe they each are? Who's to say? Well? Who?

Kohlberg did his main work in the 60s-70s. Dunno if that was before your particular dinosaur stage. He wasn't talking primitive/advanced like savages and civilized people. He was observing the moral development of individuals, from children ("it's bad because I'll get punished") to s (we hope. "Human life is valuable, and should not be sacraficed for monetary gain.") He did notice, however, that not everyone makes it along to to postconventional, and there are critics of his theory. (Especially women, who commonly hang out in conventional .)

*sneaks back in to insert 'mature @dults' before second paretheses*

Now that I understand Kohlberg a little better, I would say that the options available to your original premise are much broader than whether or not to recall, which falls under the 'ethical' category of warranty service.

Business ethics alone would stipulate, in my mind anyway, that the stockholders bite their fair share of the bullet, whatever decision is made.

Should blood money be paid? I think so. This goes back to Hammurabi[sp?]; nothing new there.

Tuesday 13th March, 2007
Hi Leo,

I have only read the first page of the info. I down loaded so I cannot as yet comment on the reference you used. I shall do so as soon as I can.

It is good to throw in other concepts and ideas to discuss as long as one listens. One can always learn - even if one is an old "dinosaur "

However.
My Collins dictionary describes "dinosaur" as being an

"extinct terrestial reptile"!!

Well, exercising great restraint(!!) - I am happy to inform you that

Also Ran is neither

extinct nor reptilian

So I think you will have to find a more accurate - and hopefully less emotive - desciption of this still-thinking geriatric (not used in the derogatory sense!!) female

As the years start to weigh down your shoulders, you will realise that debate is a superb way of, not only getting to know the Other, but also of increasing one's knowledge.

You might like to read the debate between Talcott Parsons and Alred Schutz, and the apologia that Parsons wrote to Schutz - sadly after he had died - expressing great sadness that he had not taken the debate as a learning process.

I enjoy your posts - but believe that one can learn infinitely more from intellectual, intelligent discussion.

Go well, and after this dreadful day-to-be at the dentist I hope that I shall be able to complete reading and understanding the reference you gave us.

Sincerely and with admiration for the talents which you undoubtedly possess,

Christiane AR1

Sorry, this is not a reply to this last posting!

I found Firecloud ( Phred) and this is about that: I am happy to see you ( most likely in Tampa,FL) I recall your plan going to Europe in March. Did I miss something? I am not very often on these pages.

Busy with my Web Site, yet late for the March issue. There is a suggested typing correction: Global warming is a detail spot but in GOLBAL WARNING about 6 Billion, 600 Million + and growing humans on this Earth is the cor, though not many of us want to talk about the first and major problem. I don't think God was planning this way, but certainly SATAN took over.
Yeah! I can smile about the Future: Managed to have NO Children to worry about! Sorry! I am certainly not working for the Devil's feast!
Have to go,-- plenty to stuff to work with for the March issue in Yoolly Studio remember:

GLOBAL WARNING!


Yeah, I consult the Guarian Angels what do they do when dealing with the D E V I L' S WORK!???????????
Suggestions accepted: E-mail: [email protected]
Blue bird

P.S. Pleasse do not attack me: it was not so difficult to see the future already some years ago.