|
Why is it a 'special' obligation? Isn't it a natural obligation? Wouldn't you feel horribly worse for years after if you chose to save the stranger for x, y or z moral reasons?
I personaly find arguing morals a very difficult thing to do - I think you should try and do what you know will be easier to live with for yourself, and as such, it should be instinctive.
Whether it's killing one person for the sake of 50, or saving your own child before someone else's - each and every person must do what 'feels' right to them at the moment the dilemma presents itself.
If one was to deliberate over what was right or wrong, often the moment would slip by and we would lose all the children/patients/lifeboat in whatever moral scenario we find ourselves in.
So in answer to the question, I would be justified in doing whatever I did at the time in question - can anyone rightfully condem someone who makes the 'wrong' choice in this situation?
|