The dilemma.

[thesurreal_edge]

A woman was near death from a rare form of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her, recently discovered by a druggist in the same town. The drug was expensive to make--about $400 for a small dose. But the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make--$4,000 for a small dose

Comments

[i_know_jimmy]

He should steal the drug.

People live for money in this world, a ridiculous idea of profit for anything you can manage to get your hands on worth selling. People will even sell their mind and body if it'll get them a few bucks.

He should steal the drug, this is a matter of life and death, no more serious thing can come about.

!~Paul CLimax~!

[winters_embrace]

This is a really hard scenario. You can't have him let his wife die because of someone else's selfishness, but on the other hand you can't let him steal the drug either. he could be taken away and she'd die alone, or he could get it and not have the knowledge to administer it correctly and end up with a 50/50 chance of curing her. Also, other people might go by his example. Stealign what they need. There is a positive form of protest, however that may or may not work. It was used during the civil rights movement. they could all do the same thing he does (steal the drug- or make several attempts)and go to prison. Eventually people would get it

[thesurreal_edge]

What I think is irrelevant. I was just looking for feedback and discussion. :-)

This was something from my psychology class. It is called "the dilemma" and depending on what answer you choose I can tell you where you are as far as Kohlberg's levels and stages of moral development goes.

[jdcooper]

yes, steal the drug. leave the $2000 in its place if that would make him feel better, but i dont see any ethical difficulty here, how "wrong" stealing is is a frivolous matter compared to the benefits which would be reaped from it.