In the 20th century, moral theories became more complex and were no longer concerned

solely with rightness and wrongness, but were interested in many different kinds of moral
status.[citation needed] This trend may have begun in 1930 with W. D. Ross in his book, The Right
and the Good. Here Ross argues that moral theories cannot say in general whether an action
is right or wrong but only whether it tends to be right or wrong according to a certain kind of
moral duty such as beneficence, fidelity, or justice (he called this concept of partial rightness
prima facie duty). Subsequently, philosophers have questioned whether even prima facie
duties can be articulated at a theoretical level, and some philosophers have urged a turn away
from general theorizing altogether, while others have defended theory on the grounds that it
need not be perfect in order to capture important moral insight.

In the middle of the century there was a long hiatus in the development of normative ethics
during which philosophers largely turned away from normative questions towards meta-
ethics. Even those philosophers during this period who maintained an interest in prescriptive
morality, such as R. M. Hare, attempted to arrive at normative conclusions via meta-ethical
reflection. This focus on meta-ethics was in part caused by the intense linguistic turn in
analytic philosophy and in part by the pervasiveness of logical positivism. In 1971, John
Rawls bucked the trend against normative theory in publishing A Theory of Justice. This
work was revolutionary, in part because it paid almost no attention to meta-ethics and instead
pursued moral arguments directly. In the wake of A Theory of Justice and other major works
of normative theory published in the 1970s, the field has witnessed an extraordinary
Renaissance that continues to the present day.

What Is an Ethical Dilemma?

Ethical dilemmas, also known as moral dilemmas, have been a problem for ethical theorists
as far back as Plato. An ethical dilemma is a situation wherein moral precepts or ethical
obligations conflict in such a way as to make any possible resolution to the dilemma morally
intolerable. In other words, an ethical dilemma is any situation in which guiding moral
principles cannot determine which course of action is right or wrong.

Examples of Ethical Dilemmas

1. One well-known and frequently discussed example of an ethical dilemma is given by
Jean-Paul Sartre. Sartre asks us to imagine a young man who lives with his mother; he
is her only happiness in life. But the young man lives in occupied France during
World War II and feels obliged to fight in the war. What does the young man do?
Another dilemma is a situation where three family members are being held captive.
 The captives give one the choice of which of the other two will die. If there is no
choice, they all will be killed. Obviously this is worse than choosing one person to
die, but how does one choose?

Moral Uncertainty
2. Some moral dilemmas are the result of uncertainty about what kinds of actions one
should take in order to reach the best outcome. This can be because the future results
of each decision are unknowable, or because uncertainty about facts that can influence
certain outcomes are not available. For example, if Sartre's young man knew he would
help turn the war effort around, and that he would survive it to return to his mother,
he'd be better equipped to make a decision. But he cannot know this, so his situation
remains uncertain.

Self-Imposed Dilemmas
3. Sartre's young man is the result of a self-imposed dilemma; he projects two
obligations upon himself that cannot be reconciled. Self-imposed moral dilemmas are
the result of two actions that one feels one must take, but which cannot be reconciled
to each other.

World-Imposed Dilemmas
4. World-imposed ethical dilemmas are of the type described in the second example,
where a family member must choose which of two other members must die. He is not
instigating the decision, it is being forced upon him from the outside, and he is bound
by it to make a decision.

Prohibition Dilemmas
5. Ultimately, ethical dilemmas always require choices, and often in an ethical dilemma
refraining from action is itself a moral decision. Indeed, in some moral dilemmas one
must choose whether to disobey a particular prohibition, such as a law, when
compliance results in immoral consequences. In this case, not acting is obeying the
law, but the result is morally reprehensible.