Difference between revisions of "Theme:17d406f9-0b0f-4325-aa2d-2fe186d5ff34"
From The Embassy of Good Science
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Theme |Theme Type=Principles & aspirations |Title=Moral conflict and moral dilemma |Is About=A moral conflict is a situation in which a person has two moral obligations, whi...") |
(mobo import migrateAll) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Theme | {{Theme | ||
| − | |Theme Type=Principles & | + | |Theme Type=Principles & Aspirations |
|Title=Moral conflict and moral dilemma | |Title=Moral conflict and moral dilemma | ||
|Is About=A moral conflict is a situation in which a person has two moral obligations, which cannot be met both at once. Behind these obligations lie conflicting values. Sometimes, the conflict can be resolved to the full satisfaction of the different parties involved, i.e. without leaving behind any regrettable remainder or residue. A moral dilemma is an irresolvable moral conflict, i.e. no fully satisfactory resolution is possible since all possible options for action leave behind a remainder that does not cease to be morally binding. | |Is About=A moral conflict is a situation in which a person has two moral obligations, which cannot be met both at once. Behind these obligations lie conflicting values. Sometimes, the conflict can be resolved to the full satisfaction of the different parties involved, i.e. without leaving behind any regrettable remainder or residue. A moral dilemma is an irresolvable moral conflict, i.e. no fully satisfactory resolution is possible since all possible options for action leave behind a remainder that does not cease to be morally binding. | ||
| − | |Important Because=Research integrity can involve a situation of moral conflict. This means that two courses of action are possible, which exclude one another. If one goes for one action, the alternative cannot be realized. Moreover, one has to choose between both actions; a third option, such as not making a choice, is not possible. An example is the choice between adding a person as an author to an article or not. There is no third option: either the person is made author, or not. | + | |Important Because=Research integrity can involve a situation of moral conflict. This means that two courses of action are possible, which exclude one another. If one goes for one action, the alternative cannot be realized. Moreover, one has to choose between both actions;a third option, such as not making a choice, is not possible. An example is the choice between adding a person as an author to an article or not. There is no third option: either the person is made author, or not. |
A moral conflict implies two conflicting values. In the case of authorship, these values might be gratitude (for a – albeit small - contribution) versus righteousness (acting in line with the authorship guidelines). Sometimes, moral conflicts can be resolved because one of the values clearly overrides the other. Thus, from a research integrity perspective, authorship requirements are more important than gratitude. In order to do justice to the value of gratitude, the person can be mentioned in an acknowledgement. | A moral conflict implies two conflicting values. In the case of authorship, these values might be gratitude (for a – albeit small - contribution) versus righteousness (acting in line with the authorship guidelines). Sometimes, moral conflicts can be resolved because one of the values clearly overrides the other. Thus, from a research integrity perspective, authorship requirements are more important than gratitude. In order to do justice to the value of gratitude, the person can be mentioned in an acknowledgement. | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Related To}} | {{Related To}} | ||
| − | |||
{{Tags}} | {{Tags}} | ||
Revision as of 11:41, 9 January 2020
ThemesMoral conflict and moral dilemma
What is this about?
A moral conflict is a situation in which a person has two moral obligations, which cannot be met both at once. Behind these obligations lie conflicting values. Sometimes, the conflict can be resolved to the full satisfaction of the different parties involved, i.e. without leaving behind any regrettable remainder or residue. A moral dilemma is an irresolvable moral conflict, i.e. no fully satisfactory resolution is possible since all possible options for action leave behind a remainder that does not cease to be morally binding.
Why is this important?
Research integrity can involve a situation of moral conflict. This means that two courses of action are possible, which exclude one another. If one goes for one action, the alternative cannot be realized. Moreover, one has to choose between both actions;a third option, such as not making a choice, is not possible. An example is the choice between adding a person as an author to an article or not. There is no third option: either the person is made author, or not.
A moral conflict implies two conflicting values. In the case of authorship, these values might be gratitude (for a – albeit small - contribution) versus righteousness (acting in line with the authorship guidelines). Sometimes, moral conflicts can be resolved because one of the values clearly overrides the other. Thus, from a research integrity perspective, authorship requirements are more important than gratitude. In order to do justice to the value of gratitude, the person can be mentioned in an acknowledgement.
However, there are examples of situations in research where conflicts can be irresolvable, because the person who has to choose feels the obligation to do justice to two incompatible values. In such cases, one is confronted with a moral dilemma (1, 2). A moral dilemma is a conflict situation in which the choice one makes causes a moral harm, which cannot be restlessly repaired. Take the example of how to respond when a fellow researcher needs help, but refuses your assistance. In light of the value of care, you should at least try to convince her that support is needed. On the other hand, the value of autonomy might indicate that you should not impose yourself upon her. Whatever you decide to do, you do harm to one of the two values involved. If you choose to try and get her to accept support, she might feel being treated as an incompetent researcher. If you choose to let go, she might get in serious difficulty with her research.For whom is this important?
The Embassy Editorial team, Ružica Tokalić, Iris Lechner, Guy Widdershoven, Jan Helge Solbak contributed to this theme. Latest contribution was Mar 25, 2021
