What Would You Do: Communication Ethics Dilemma

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Problem Under Consideration
Those Affected by the Problem
Other Facts from the Case
Three Ethical Theories
Conclusion

Communication can be seen as a simple thing when mentioned, but its application, especially regarding ethics, can be challenging. Life presents some situations or dilemmas that make ethical applications more confusing as it leaves people wondering about the best course of action to take. The video “What Would You Do” presents different dilemmas to capture how people will respond and uncovers the reason behind their actions. Understanding the idea presented by the case study will be achieved by describing what the problem under consideration is, those affected, facts emerging from the case, ethical theories involved, pointing out recommendations and their consequences after application, some arguments, and whether the recommendations proposed are appealing or not.

Problem Under Consideration

The case study presents a different version of the response to dilemmas. The actors pretend to do what people may think is wrong to provoke reactions. However, in the same situation, drugging the lady is perceived differently when the same woman appears when dressed in what people may describe as not moral. Another instance used to illustrate the issue is cutting the line in the supermarket, where the victims are perceived differently. Some think it is right for the pregnant woman to cut the line but not the old lady with his son. The issue of awarding the person allowed to cut the line was seen as unfair, hence not right by the shoppers, and instead argued they should have been awarded instead. This helps solve ethical issues and how the same information is digested dissimilarly. Everyone can justify his/her reaction as they want to be safe from embarrassment.

Those Affected by the Problem

I would argue that everybody involved in the issue is affected. The effects can be psychological, health-wise, and physical. For example, the people in the restaurants suffered psychologically as they wondered about the impacts of their silence if the lady if affected by the drug. The actors are confronted by those people who feel they are doing the wrong things, as they need to speak up. However, in this case, the people surrounding the actors suffer as they try to figure out what to do or what is the right decision as they want to be safe.

Other Facts from the Case

The naked fact or truth from the case is that every person wants to play safe. They do not want to be humiliated by stepping into others’ lines or feel they did not offer their assistance where it was required. Similarly, people have to defend what they believe is right. However, the perceptions have turned to be different from one person to the other, and this tells us that morals may be understood differently as a piece of information may differ when consumed by people in terms of meaning or course of action.

Three Ethical Theories

Deontology, justice, and beneficence are the most appropriate ethical theories to apply in some of the dilemmas presented. Justice theory would apply where the shoppers allow the pregnant lady to cut the line and the woman being waited by his husband outside. Deontology theory came when the man at lunch requested the shoppers to allow him to cut the line to avoid being late to work. Applying the theory shows that the man observes his obligation of being at work on time, which was considered ethically correct by the shoppers and allowed him. Beneficence theory comes in the first instance where the man is drugging the lady. Most of the audience that saw the man putting the drug into the drink were confused as they wondered about the best action. According to beneficence theory, they were trying to figure out what is right and good and what their action would result. Therefore, they settle on the best course of action as they decide to question the man or keep quiet.

Conclusion

Recommendations for Resolving the Dilemmas

For the dilemma where the man is drugging the lady, everyone should be allowed to apply the beneficence concept naturally. For the second instance, where the man is at lunch break, the shoppers should allow him to adhere to the work obligations if possible and not in a hurry. Cutting line dilemma, no need to force any shopper to let anybody cut the line, but they should be left to decide on what they believe should be given priority.

Consequences of the Following Recommendations

The applications of the proposed recommendations would help reduce conflict as all the parties involved should make their decision willingly. However, in some instances, the actions taken by the parties may be termed as not morally acceptable or unethical. To avoid this conflict, everything should work naturally on what people believe is right individually. It will show respect for people’s different perceptions as they do it voluntarily.

Argument against Recommendations

However, even if it is good to let the people decide on their own, it would be best when we view things on their side effects if not handled correctly. Instead, we have a common perception of things to ensure everyone is forced to abide by. For example, the restaurant should have a way to encourage whistleblowing as well as supermarket should ensure fragile shoppers are served with the speed they deserve.

Despite these limitations, I would still believe that leaving people to decide on what is right, good, or wrong is the best approach. This is because it would encourage them to follow what they feel is good in every situation without harming or annoying them if rules are imposed on them. Thus, let people follow or do what they view as ethically or morally correct when interacting with others.

Click Here To Order Now!