To Save, Or Not to Save. That is the Question.
Man, it has been one hell of a war. The Germans have really been giving us a run for our money. Their cipher has been immune to all of our attempts to crack it, and we REALLY need to crack it. I can almost feel how close we are to …
Wait, holy crap! It worked! We cracked the Enigma Machine!
Now let me break through that excitement with some incredibly bad news. While you may have cracked the code, you have also, in doing so, found that the Germans are planning on bombing a major U.S. City. You also know that if you were to pass along this information, allowing the city to build up forces to brace against the attack, the Germans would know you cracked their code. If they figure this out, they will likely change their code and you will again be in the dark to their communications, thereby possibly killing even more people due to being unable to stop the war.
Do you do tip them off?
Should you tip them off?
This question is one that is riddled with moral and ethical dilemmas. It all really boils down to whether or not you believe in utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the idea that the outcome of an action depicts whether or not the action is right or wrong. Therefore, a “right” action is one that gives the greatest good to the greatest number of people, regardless of who these people are.
I feel as if most people when looking at this would probably say that they would not tip off this U.S. city. You may be able to save a greater number of people by not tipping them off correct?
What if I were to muddy the waters a little bit more and I told you that your family lived in that city. Your entire family. Would you still not tip them off?
What if, further still, your significant other’s family ALSO lives in that city, and if you refuse to tip them off, you know without a doubt that your significant other would leave you. How about now?
The issue has become a little bit more difficult, huh?
The issue of utilitarianism in and of itself is that it does not take into account the personal feelings and attachments of the persons involved. I do not think that if actually put into this situation I would have the wherewithal to make the decision to not tip off the city. It would be a decision that would definitely keep me up at night, that is for sure.
I am sure that you are going to ask what I would do. I really wish that I could tell you. It is one of those instances that I cannot see a good outcome. Either you ruin your own life for sure and possibly save a great many more lives, OR you ruin possibly a great many more lives, while possibly being able to keep your own life from going into shambles.
Do you love your life, or the lives of many, more? What has greater value to you? What would you be able to live with? What decision would allow you to sleep at night?
The reality is that something sort of similar did happen, and someone did have to live with this decision. The man that made this decision is a household name.
Winston Churchill.
While Churchill did not have family in the at-risk city of Coventry, he did make the decision to withhold the information. Because of his decision, 554 people were killed, and 4,865 were wounded. I’m sure that most of those people had families. Every single one would have probably liked to live. Every single one, if given the chance, would probably have spared their own life and their family’s lives. If put into the same position as Churchill, I am unsure what decision they would have made. Can you blame them?
One statistic that I do not know is how many people were saved as a result of keeping the breaking of the Enigma Machine secret.
Perhaps Churchill saved more, perhaps he saved less. That, however, is something that we will simply never know, but it will remain one of the biggest ethical dilemmas of its time.
