Ethical Theories: The Shallow Pond Case

Before learning about all of the different ethical theories we had a few different cases to think about and decide what we do in the situation. I believe that at the time I based my decisions solely on what I thought I should do, but had absoluetly no explaination as to why. Now, though some of my answers have changed and some have not, I have a new found knowledge and understanding of ethics that has better shaped my decisions and understanding of the world in general. My initial response to the Shallow Pond case was to miss the exam and save the child 's life. In the Coffee vs Letter case I chose to donate. With the connection case I chose to stay connected to save the persons life. Like previously stated the reasons behind the decisions was simply that these are what I believe and society has taught me were the right things to do, because they were selfless and better the lives of others. But now after learning about the different ethical theories, I have a better understandingof the cases and can now aplly these theories to situations in my life and the real world. When looking at the Shallow Pond dilemma a utilatarian would look at the situation and try to determine what actions would produce the best outcome and reduce the most suffering for all involved. The utilitarian would save the child and …show more content…
A follower of kantian ethics would see it as their duty to save lives and believe they good will makes the dicision morally correct. Someone who follows virtue ethics would see this as a chance to show that they are compassionate and fair and would stay connected to allow the person have a chance at life. A person that focuses on egoism would not even have to think about the situation they would get nothing from stay connected to the person, so they would not do so, they would save