I hate getting pwned by the "d" button.
I was presented this situation in one of my classes. If I remember correctly it was business ethics.
Situation:
Your spouse is diagnosed with a form of cancer and will die if not treated. The only available drug is made by a local pharmacist. He sells the product for 4000 bucks. It costs the pharmacist 2000 bucks to make the drug. You have tried your hardest and have been able to come up with 3000 bucks. That is all you can come up with. The pharmacist will not sell you the drug for 3000 bucks.
Do you steal the drug for you spouse?
If you would steal it for your spouse, would you steal it for an individual that you know, but not well?
Who is the immoral individual in this situation?
I thought it odd that almost every Asian person in my class said they would not steal the substance for their spouse. A lot of problems arise during this situation. From the view of mankind the pharmacist is acting immorally. Yet, from the view of mankind, one should also steal the substance for someone you only sort of know. What would you all answer?
Edited, Fri Dec 9 15:04:05 2005 by fenderputy