Moral Dilemma Quiz
Questions: 16 · 10 minutes
1. A neighbor deciding how to support an overwhelmed caregiver focuses on their relationship, the caregiver's particular needs, and the responsibilities created by dependence. Which approach does this most closely reflect?
Ethical egoism, because helping always advances self-interest.
Care ethics, which emphasizes relationships, context, and responsiveness to need.
Act consequentialism concerned only with calculating total benefits.
Strict legalism, because personal relationships determine written law.
2. A rescue coordinator sends limited supplies where they are expected to save the greatest number of lives. Which reasoning is most evident?
Deontological reasoning that treats allocation rules as absolute.
Consequentialist reasoning focused on overall outcomes.
Virtue reasoning concerned only with the coordinator's motives.
Relativist reasoning that rejects comparison between outcomes.
3. A student finds that a broad moral principle conflicts with a well-considered judgment about a specific case. The student revises each in light of the other until they fit more coherently. What method is this?
Moral relativism, which prevents comparison between moral beliefs.
Cost-benefit analysis, which assigns a monetary value to every principle.
Deduction from a fixed rule that can never be reconsidered.
Reflective equilibrium, which seeks coherence between principles and considered judgments.
4. A deontological approach primarily evaluates an action by asking whether it:
Produces more benefits than harms in this particular case.
Expresses the decision-maker's strongest personal commitments.
Conforms to relevant duties, principles, or rights.
Matches what most people in the community prefer.
5. Which consideration is most characteristic of virtue ethics?
Whether the action maximizes the total amount of satisfaction.
Whether the action complies with every applicable written rule.
Whether the action would receive majority approval.
Whether the action reflects traits such as courage, honesty, and practical wisdom.
6. Before choosing between two difficult policies, a committee lists everyone who may benefit, bear costs, or lose a protected interest. What reasoning tool is it using?
A popularity poll to determine which policy is morally true.
Stakeholder analysis to identify affected parties and their interests.
A character test focused exclusively on committee members.
A legal review that assumes lawful policies are automatically ethical.
7. Which situation is best described as a genuine moral dilemma?
Two morally significant duties conflict, and fulfilling either one requires compromising the other.
A person wants two incompatible things, but neither choice affects anyone morally.
The correct action is clear, but it is inconvenient or expensive.
A rule gives an unambiguous answer that everyone involved accepts.
8. Which question is most central to consequentialist reasoning?
Does this action follow a duty regardless of what happens afterward?
Which option most faithfully preserves an established tradition?
What would a person with admirable character naturally choose?
Which available action is likely to produce the best overall consequences?
9. A counselor has promised confidentiality but learns of a credible plan to cause imminent serious harm. What creates the moral dilemma?
The duty to preserve confidentiality conflicts with the duty to help prevent serious harm.
The counselor dislikes both available choices equally.
Professional duties have no relevance once harm is mentioned.
The law and morality necessarily require opposite actions.
10. A manager considers a rule allowing employees to lie whenever honesty would be uncomfortable. Applying a universalization test, the manager should ask:
Whether the rule could be consistently accepted for everyone in comparable circumstances.
Whether lying has produced good results at least once in the past.
Whether the rule would make this particular manager feel less guilty.
Whether most employees expect the manager to approve it.
11. A company uses a legal loophole to impose unexpected fees on customers who have few alternatives. Which conclusion best distinguishes legality from morality?
Moral evaluation applies only when a law has been broken.
Anything permitted by law is morally required.
An action can comply with current law while remaining open to ethical criticism.
Unethical business conduct is always already prohibited by law.
12. A procurement officer receives an expensive gift from a vendor just before evaluating that vendor's bid. Why is this ethically concerning even if the officer believes it will not affect the decision?
Receiving any gift proves that the vendor's bid is technically inferior.
The gift turns the procurement decision into a conflict between two absolute duties.
It creates a conflict of interest that may compromise, or appear to compromise, impartial judgment.
Personal confidence is enough to remove any concern about bias.
13. During an emergency, officials compare several measures that could achieve the same protective goal. Which choice best follows the principle of proportionality?
The most restrictive measure, because stronger interference is always more ethical.
The least expensive measure, regardless of whether it protects people adequately.
The least burdensome measure that can adequately achieve the legitimate protective goal.
The measure that imposes equal inconvenience on everyone, regardless of need.
14. A research volunteer agrees to participate but cannot explain the study's major risks in their own words. What is the clearest ethical concern?
Consent is valid whenever a form has been signed.
The researcher should pause and support adequate understanding before treating the consent as informed.
The volunteer's agreement should be replaced by a majority vote from other participants.
The study must be unethical because all research involves some risk.
15. Two equally reckless drivers run the same red light; only one happens to injure someone. The idea of moral luck highlights that:
Intentions never matter when judging conduct.
Both drivers must receive identical legal penalties in every system.
Accidental outcomes erase responsibility for reckless choices.
Factors outside a person's control can influence how their conduct is morally judged.
16. A supervisor notices that a machine is about to release an unsafe product but deliberately declines to press the available stop button. This is best classified as:
An omission—a morally relevant failure to act.
A direct action because noticing danger automatically counts as causing it.
A value-neutral event because the supervisor did not start the machine.
A genuine dilemma because every failure to act involves conflicting duties.