Everything from enviromentalism to abortion to campaign finance to types of economics to capitol punishment, etc. please.
Basically, all of the stuff where question is about if the action is right or wrong, not how something works or what something is. Although there is only a razors hair of difference between the two questions, the difference is there and it means everything.
I want to be sure I do not forget anything important.
Are you looking for theoretical or practical problems?
In other words, do you want something like “If a brain surgeon and a tramp are on a raft with only enough water for one, is the surgeon entitled to push the tramp off?” or “If you and a group of friends were captured by bandits, and the bandits said ‘Either you kill one of your friends, or we’ll kill two of them’, what should you do?”, or actual decisions that politicians, doctors, etc have to take in the real world that don’t have a clear right or wrong ethical answer?
GQ answer: No.
A good starting place might be the Wikipedia article on Ethics. The “Applied ethics” section lists a few potentially controversial areas and you can read those articles for more ideas or details.
The first one would be something like, “Blame the cat for knocking over the lamp, or confess to doing it yourself?”
“What seems more preposterous, Jesus or Hercules?”
“If I got away with it, was it still wrong?”
“Should I make fun of the goody-goody kids, or be one?”
“Mom gets mad if I beat somebody up. Dad gets mad if I get beat up. What should I do?”
“My parents say I can talk to them about anything, but something tells me they don’t want to know I got laid.”
That’s enough to get you through high school.
How can I possibly justify the standard of living that I keep when there is so much suffering in the world that could be relieved by the money that I use to indulge myself?
“If I find I don’t share my parents’ religious beliefs, should I tell them, or just let them think I’m one of them?”
“When I’m looking for a job, should I follow my bliss, or should I go for the most money?”
“On the job, I’m told to do something unethical or illegal. Shall I refuse, or keep my job?”
“Something I want is offered for sale by a friend, but the low price says stolen. Should I buy it?”
“A dying, stroke-addled friend asks me to help him to commit suicide. Should I?”
“I’ve surprised a burglar in my home, and I’m looking at him over the sights of a 9mm Glock pistol. Should I shoot him, or should I tell to drop everything and get out?”
“I find a wallet it a public place; it has credit cards, a driver’s license, and $400 cash. What to do? If I find the owner and give it back, do I accept his offer of a reward?”
One I deal with in real life all the time:
“Do I fight and argue with the client in order to produce the best work possible, or do I just put in whatever the client asks for, even though the result will be a piece of semi-literate crap?”
This is a question I would like answered by the “95 percenters” who say they really do love their God.
Apparently my definition of love is different than most.
A Real Life Medical one from a Dublin Maternity hospital:
A woman who was 18 weeks (6 weeks before viability) pregnant with non identical IVF triplets. The amniotic sac around the lowest baby breaks. At this stage, if she went into labour all babies would die, the ruptured sac is a real risk for premature labour.
The baby with the leaking fluid will almost certainly die anyway, as the lack of fluid will mean that it’s lungs will not develop.
The ruptured sac is also a serious risk for chorioamnionitis, an infection that could potentially kill all three babies…and the mother.
A possible course of action is to inject potassium into the heart of the lowest triplet, killing it. The other babies should then move down, sealing the uterus and removing the infection risk and reducing the risk of premature labour. However, even if the termination is successful there is certainty that this would happen and permature labour or infection could still occur.
Should one (probably non-viable) life be sacrified for the other 3?
Should the facts that so much money was spent creating these babies through IVF, and that this is the couple’s last attempt at having children factor into this decision?
In the real life case, as abortion isn’t legal in Ireland except when the life of the mother is at risk, the obstetrician in charge was in the process of going before the hospital ethics committee in order to authourise the termination. Unfortunately, before he could receive permission, the lady went into labour and all three babies died, sadly infection was already present and the mother almost died herself.
Crap. That should read “There is NO certainty that this would happen”.
Apologies.
I think there’s an ethical dilemma when some president (no names) just up and says “Let’s switch all our science budget to a manned trip to Mars”. In other words, chosing flash over substance in budgeting.
Also, the choice to do either type of thing when people are homeless and you could house them all for a fraction of that amoount. In otherwords, spending public funds for the haves instead of the have nots.