INTERVIEW FOR CSE 2019 All ForumIAS members selected for CSE 2019 Personality Test must submit their details and DAF and register below to receive further instructions and guidance from ForumIAS. Click here to register now
INTERVIEW 2020 CHANNEL ForumIAS Channel for Interview Preparation is now Active! Please join the channel by clicking here
Just picked up case studies for a couple of days. While I was able to write something for most of them i.e. take both the sides and arrive at a compromising situation or at least justify the one I back using deon/teleo approach, I could not justify some. How to go about it? Here's one of them from Halfmantr -
In 1842, a ship struck an iceberg and more than 30 survivors were crowded into a lifeboat intended to hold 7. As a storm threatened, it became obvious that the lifeboat would have to be lightened if anyone were to survive. The captain reasoned that the right thing to do in this situation was to force some individuals to go over the side and drown. Such an action, he reasoned, was not unjust to those thrown overboard, for they would have drowned anyway. If he did nothing, however, he would be responsible for the deaths of those whom he could have saved. Some people opposed the captain's decision. They claimed that if nothing were done and everyone died as a result, no one would be responsible for these deaths. On the other hand, if the captain attempted to save some, he could do so only by killing others and their deaths would be his responsibility; this would be worse than doing nothing and letting all die. The captain rejected this reasoning. Since the only possibility for rescue required great efforts of rowing, the captain decided that the weakest would have to be sacrificed. In this situation it would be absurd, he thought, to decide by drawing lots who should be thrown overboard. As it turned out, after days of hard rowing, the survivors were rescued and the captain was tried for his action. If you had been on the jury, how would you have decided?
The captain should be held at fault here because: 1. The lack of sufficient lifeboats in the first place is the captain's fault. 2. The captain has himself not followed the maritime tradition of being the last one to abandon the ship. As the captain, the lives of his passengers and crew is meant to have precedence over his own life. He has displayed cowardice by choosing to save himself and throwing the weak overboard. Since it is clear that he is acting out of self-preservation, it can be assumed that he may have thrown over more people than would have been necessary. 3. The future cannot be known with any degree of certainty. The captain has made an unfounded assumption that rowing away from the ship will increase the chance of rescue. When it is equally likely that rescue ships will converge on the site of the mishap to look for survivors.
However, considering the exigent circumstances, I would be in favour of some leniency in sentencing.
btw "lifeboat ethics" is a whole sub-stream of ethics studies.
@Stardust Thanks. Although there's no "absolutely correct or wrong" answer in case studies, I think it would wrong to assume things (like captain to be held responsible for lesser lifeboats, it could well be that they were damaged during the disaster and therefore overcrowding).
I was of the opinion to exonerate the captain but struggled for a plausible explanation. Although you rightly pointed out that a link between rowing & chances of survival can't be presumed, don't you think he was vindicated at the end when it is specially mentioned at the end that - "after days of hard rowing, the survivors were rescued"?
Anyway, I was looking to see if a stand can be taken or not in these questions and you did take one.
@Siddharth I googled this a bit and basically there is no right answer to this question. Depending on your personal social/ethical views, the answer varies from complete exoneration to death sentence. Taking a stand either way in necessary in this question otherwise the answer will be weak.
If asked to exonerate the captain, my answer would have been:
Since the lifeboat is meant for 7 people, keeping 30 on would have been suicidal because there was a storm imminent and the strong winds and turbulence would have probably overturned the lifeboat, killing everyone on board.
Making the decision to keep only the most healthy on board was a rational decision taking into account the fact that they could have been at sea for an indeterminate amount of time while waiting for rescue. The captain had realised that the rescue is most possible if they row towards the general direction of the coast, which required the lifeboat to be light enough to move quickly.
While the captain's decision may not have been perfect, it was made in the heat of the moment based on the information available to him. It would have been foolhardy to assume that the lifeboat could have conceivably carried four times its capacity for a long time.
His foresight and decision-making was vindicated when they were rescued after days of rowing. They would certainly not have been able to row for such a long distance and time with an overcrowded lifeboat, if they had somehow managed to even survive the storm.
(Having said this, I am not in favour of forgiving someone for intentional killing of others in order to save themselves.)
Well I am no judge and am not aspiring to be one. Just sharing my thoughts - I haven't read the above comments yet.
The questions that I would ask myself -
1. Did he act in self preservation or for larger good? What were his underlying intentions - were his actions in good faith? Did he have any other option? If yes, was it worse than this? What are the opinions of the crew and fellow passengers, if they agreed to this and did not protest - It does give some legitimacy to his actions.
2. What will be the implications of my judgement?
Regarding the first set of questions:
The captain of the ship is a captain for a reason - He has to take decisions in such grievous situations. It is his moral responsibility and duty to save the lives of his crew. He should act in the best interest of his crew.
What options did he have?
1. Nobody is thrown - the boat sinks, everybody dies. 2. He drowns himself to save one extra person. But the captain should not sacrifice his life at the moment when he is required the most - If he kills himself, the people will be left directionless and with nobody to lead the group to safety. They will eventually be lost in the vast ocean. Also, there is a possibility that without a leader, in such situations, people will not cooperate and will lack cohesion and solidarity and therefore spelling doom. 3. He did what he did. Save as many life as possible.
Considering the situation and the fact that nobody objected or protested against his decision during the crisis indicates that this was probably the best option he had.
If I were to charge him and sentence him for murder, it will demotivate many other future captains who otherwise would have risked their life to save fellow humans.
In future, the captain would probably be afraid to take any decision because of this verdict. The crew of future ships will have no faith in their captain, if it were to be pronounced that what the present captain did was unethical and amounts to murder. It will then become difficult for the captain to keep his crew united.
But at the same time, he should be held accountable for lack of adequate number of life boats and for ignoring other safety protocols which amounted to loss of life. This is a serious offense in itself, he should be given the harshest punishment as per the law of the land but at the same time it should be made clear that this punishment is not for his decision that he had to make but for the gross dereliction of duty and lack of preparedness which resulted in so many people being killed. This would probably send the right message to all, and captains in future will be more serious about safety norms.
@Partho you assume, like our Captain, that not throwing anyone overboard would necessarily mean that everyone dies.
- since 30 people have gotten on the lifeboat, it is obvious that it can hold this many people or else it would have already capsized under their weight. - the lifeboat could have survived through the storm or the storm might have been weak. - rescue boats and helicopters could have arrived at the accident site the next morning since modern ships have GPS and/or they would have sent out an SOS when they hit the iceberg. - even after throwing the weak they could have rowed for days and died anyway. - there is no reason to assume that rowing was the better strategy than waiting at that spot.
@Partho you assume, like our Captain, that not throwing anyone overboard would necessarily mean that everyone dies.
- the lifeboat could have survived through the storm or the storm might have been weak. - rescue boats and helicopters could have arrived at the accident site the next morning since modern ships have GPS and/or they would have sent out an SOS when they hit the iceberg. - even after throwing the weak they could have rowed for days and died anyway.
1. I am not assuming - That is what the captain thought best. And as a captain, he knows best. He is the most apt person in such a situation to make decisions, not a judge! I agree nobody can predict the future, captain had to decide based on the limited resources that he had, he took his chances.
2. The year is 1842! No GPS, no Helicopters and no means of communication - The only way to survive was to row as much as they can!
@Partho you assume, like our Captain, that not throwing anyone overboard would necessarily mean that everyone dies.
- since 30 people have gotten on the lifeboat, it is obvious that it can hold this many people or else it would have already capsized under their weight. - the lifeboat could have survived through the storm or the storm might have been weak. - rescue boats and helicopters could have arrived at the accident site the next morning since modern ships have GPS and/or they would have sent out an SOS when they hit the iceberg. - even after throwing the weak they could have rowed for days and died anyway. - there is no reason to assume that rowing was the better strategy than waiting at that spot.
I am just saying, whatever decision he made - Right or wrong is not the question - nobody can make a 'right' decision in such situation, it will always be a matter of chance.
I just read some of the ethics questions in one of the paper uploaded here some time back. Are you guys reading on these lines? I could not even attempt 100marks. Just want to check if I need to change direction !!
I just read some of the ethics questions in one of the paper uploaded here some time back. Are you guys reading on these lines? I could not even attempt 100marks. Just want to check if I need to change direction !!
Where did you get this paper from? Lol!
I don't think anybody can complete this paper and score even 100 marks! I hope, UPSC does not ask such theoretical questions! Some case studies are relevant and can be practiced. And don't you think, it is little late to change directions?? You should rather feel confident with whatever you have done. I am sure, that much is enough for you to clear mains. (Nobody can tell the difference between genuine confidence and fake confidence! Not even self! )
We are a secret self-moderated community for Civil Services preparation. Feel free to join, start a discussion, answer a question or just to say Thank you.Just dont spread the word ;)Sign in or join with Facebook or Google
ForumIAS is India’s leading Online website for UPSC IAS Exam Online Preparation and guidance. At ForumIAS, we have a dream. Our dream is to make its members achieve their IAS dream. Today thousands of aspirants have joined the elite services such as IAS, IPS, IFS, IRS and other central and state services with the right inputs provided by ForumIAS. Take a look at our IAS Toppers
Free IAS Online Preparation Initiatives by ForumIAS
Current affairs is the most important part of UPSC IAS exam. ForumIAS provides a detailed analysis of important news articles through its 9PM brief. In current affairs reading Editorials Online needs an in-depth focus and hence we provide a separate analysis of daily editorials which is not found in any other website. Click the following link to access these free preparation initiatives in Portal . ForumIAS also provides compilations and Free downloads for UPSC IAS preparation
Knowing is never enough for IAS exam. An IAS aspirant must be engaged in answer writing practice to do well in UPSC IAS Mains Exam. ForumIAS has launched a Mains Marathon initiative for IAS mains Online answer writing. Click here to access UPSC Mains Marathon initiative . For Daily Must Read Newspaper articles, Visit Must Read Newspaper page here. Must Read Newspaper is an Initiative by Team ForumIAS to provide Current Affairs links to the Must Read Articles of The Day from Newspaper.
UPSC Syllabus
The most important part of UPSC IAS exam is its syllabus and there is a need to take an in-depth look at it. Click here to view the UPSC IAS Prelims syllabus. Visit UPSC IAS syllabus page here
UPSC IAS Study Material
ForumIAS is the repository of many toppers’ Online study materials for GS Mains and Optional subjects. The most unique thing about it is that they are handwritten by toppers themselves. Click here for UPSC sample notes
Interview Preparation for IAS
Interview is the last and crucial stage for becoming an IAS officer. How to prepare for it? We provide a solution. ForumIAS is the only online website where quality IAS interview preparations happen. Online Current affairs from an interview perspective are extensively discussed and specific preparation based on candidate’s profile and hobbies can be done. Please visit this link for UPSC Interview Preparation
At ForumIAS we have an exclusive Online page to read the UPSC Interview Transcripts
Indian Forest Service (IFoS)
IFoS is one of the most sought after All India Service. ForumIAS provides the right approach to excel in this exam through their toppers who have shared their success mantras and their study materials in an elaborate manner.
About Indian Administrative Service (IAS)
IAS is considered as one of the best jobs on earth. IAS officers hold the most important positions in Central and State Governments and in Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs). They also represent India in international organizations. They take the most important decisions in the administration of Government policies and development programs.
About Indian Police Service (IPS)
IPS officers occupy higher positions in the State Police Departments, Central Armed Police Forces and Intelligence Agencies. Their most important responsibilities are maintenance of Law and Order and internal security.
About Indian Foreign Service (IFS)
IFS officers serve as diplomats in international missions and embassies of India around the world and in prominent international organizations like United Nations (UN), World Bank, and IMF. They work to promote India’s interests from a bilateral and a global perspective.
The Study portal is a single point of online IAS preparation through its several initiatives like the Must Read News Articles, the 9 PM Brief, the Mains Marathon. If you are preparing for IAS exam online, ForumIAS is the place to go. ForumIAS is proud of ForumIAS Alumni in UPSC Service who have secured top Ranks in past 5 years.
Visit Us At
ForumIAS - Offline Guidance Centre
ForumIAS Academy, 1st Floor, IAPL House, 19, Pusa Road, Opposite Metro Pillar 95-96, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005,
View Google Map Location
Comments
1. The lack of sufficient lifeboats in the first place is the captain's fault.
2. The captain has himself not followed the maritime tradition of being the last one to abandon the ship. As the captain, the lives of his passengers and crew is meant to have precedence over his own life. He has displayed cowardice by choosing to save himself and throwing the weak overboard. Since it is clear that he is acting out of self-preservation, it can be assumed that he may have thrown over more people than would have been necessary.
3. The future cannot be known with any degree of certainty. The captain has made an unfounded assumption that rowing away from the ship will increase the chance of rescue. When it is equally likely that rescue ships will converge on the site of the mishap to look for survivors.
However, considering the exigent circumstances, I would be in favour of some leniency in sentencing.
btw "lifeboat ethics" is a whole sub-stream of ethics studies.
Thanks. Although there's no "absolutely correct or wrong" answer in case studies, I think it would wrong to assume things (like captain to be held responsible for lesser lifeboats, it could well be that they were damaged during the disaster and therefore overcrowding).
I was of the opinion to exonerate the captain but struggled for a plausible explanation. Although you rightly pointed out that a link between rowing & chances of survival can't be presumed, don't you think he was vindicated at the end when it is specially mentioned at the end that - "after days of hard rowing, the survivors were rescued"?
Anyway, I was looking to see if a stand can be taken or not in these questions and you did take one.
If asked to exonerate the captain, my answer would have been:
Since the lifeboat is meant for 7 people, keeping 30 on would have been suicidal because there was a storm imminent and the strong winds and turbulence would have probably overturned the lifeboat, killing everyone on board.
Making the decision to keep only the most healthy on board was a rational decision taking into account the fact that they could have been at sea for an indeterminate amount of time while waiting for rescue. The captain had realised that the rescue is most possible if they row towards the general direction of the coast, which required the lifeboat to be light enough to move quickly.
While the captain's decision may not have been perfect, it was made in the heat of the moment based on the information available to him. It would have been foolhardy to assume that the lifeboat could have conceivably carried four times its capacity for a long time.
His foresight and decision-making was vindicated when they were rescued after days of rowing. They would certainly not have been able to row for such a long distance and time with an overcrowded lifeboat, if they had somehow managed to even survive the storm.
(Having said this, I am not in favour of forgiving someone for intentional killing of others in order to save themselves.)
The questions that I would ask myself -
1. Did he act in self preservation or for larger good? What were his underlying intentions - were his actions in good faith? Did he have any other option? If yes, was it worse than this? What are the opinions of the crew and fellow passengers, if they agreed to this and did not protest - It does give some legitimacy to his actions.
2. What will be the implications of my judgement?
Regarding the first set of questions:
The captain of the ship is a captain for a reason - He has to take decisions in such grievous situations. It is his moral responsibility and duty to save the lives of his crew. He should act in the best interest of his crew.
What options did he have?
1. Nobody is thrown - the boat sinks, everybody dies.
2. He drowns himself to save one extra person. But the captain should not sacrifice his life at the moment when he is required the most - If he kills himself, the people will be left directionless and with nobody to lead the group to safety. They will eventually be lost in the vast ocean. Also, there is a possibility that without a leader, in such situations, people will not cooperate and will lack cohesion and solidarity and therefore spelling doom.
3. He did what he did. Save as many life as possible.
Considering the situation and the fact that nobody objected or protested against his decision during the crisis indicates that this was probably the best option he had.
If I were to charge him and sentence him for murder, it will demotivate many other future captains who otherwise would have risked their life to save fellow humans.
In future, the captain would probably be afraid to take any decision because of this verdict. The crew of future ships will have no faith in their captain, if it were to be pronounced that what the present captain did was unethical and amounts to murder. It will then become difficult for the captain to keep his crew united.
But at the same time, he should be held accountable for lack of adequate number of life boats and for ignoring other safety protocols which amounted to loss of life. This is a serious offense in itself, he should be given the harshest punishment as per the law of the land but at the same time it should be made clear that this punishment is not for his decision that he had to make but for the gross dereliction of duty and lack of preparedness which resulted in so many people being killed. This would probably send the right message to all, and captains in future will be more serious about safety norms.
- since 30 people have gotten on the lifeboat, it is obvious that it can hold this many people or else it would have already capsized under their weight.
- the lifeboat could have survived through the storm or the storm might have been weak.
- rescue boats and helicopters could have arrived at the accident site the next morning since modern ships have GPS and/or they would have sent out an SOS when they hit the iceberg.
- even after throwing the weak they could have rowed for days and died anyway.
- there is no reason to assume that rowing was the better strategy than waiting at that spot.
2. The year is 1842! No GPS, no Helicopters and no means of communication - The only way to survive was to row as much as they can!
I don't think anybody can complete this paper and score even 100 marks! I hope, UPSC does not ask such theoretical questions! Some case studies are relevant and can be practiced. And don't you think, it is little late to change directions?? You should rather feel confident with whatever you have done. I am sure, that much is enough for you to clear mains. (Nobody can tell the difference between genuine confidence and fake confidence! Not even self!