Name: Maica N. Peñanueva, BAELS 2
Activity 2: The Parable of the Sadhu
1. Evaluate the decision of McCoy and his team. Do you think it is right?
McCoy and the hikers helped the Sadhu in a certain way like giving him
clothes, food, and drink, however they still continue their hike to accomplish their
goals while leaving the Sadhu on a large rock, awake but weak. Their decisions
were based on their own individual goals. They were too focused on reaching the
place rather than ensuring the ultimate well-being of the Sadhu. If I were to judge
their decision, I would say it was morally wrong. It is a basic human instinct to help
a person who is in need and in their case, they were more concerned with their
self-interests.
McCoy is concerned with the delay because he was afraid that if they would
wait a little longer to resume the climb, the sun would melt the snow that would
help him cross the mountain pass. He was also worried with his altitude sickness
that he previously suffered at a lower attitude. The New Zealander who brought
the Sadhu left him with them because he reasoned that McCoy’s team had porters
who could help in bringing the man down the mountain. On the other hand, the
Japanese refused to lend his horse, and Pasang resisted the idea of letting the
porters carry the man down the mountain because they needed the energy and
strength to get across the pass. Only Stephen had the initiative to bring the man
down the mountain, however, he lacks the needed support from the majority, so
he could do nothing.
The decision of the group, I believe, was morally wrong because it violated
the moral standards which normally promotes the “good”, that is the welfare and
well–being of humans, animals, and the environment. Leaving the Sadhu in that
large rock might possibly threaten his well-being. However, their decision was
ethically right in a sense that the consequence produced greatest good to the
greatest number in accordance with the utilitarian approach. That is, they were
able to accomplish their goals.
2. If you were in the hiker’s situation, will you do the same? If not, then why?
No. If something can still be done to ensure the ultimate well-being of the
Sadhu, then I’ll definitely help him. The situation was a life and death matter, so I
think saving someone in that particular condition is more important than
accomplishing my goal. Besides, I don’t want to be eaten by guilt just because I
failed to act as a decent human being.
3. Are the hikers making a moral decision or not? Why do you say so?
A moral decision, by definition, is a choice made based on a person’s ethics,
manners, characters, and what they believe is proper behavior. These decisions
tend to affect not only our own well-being, but the well-being of others. In the
parable, the hikers decided to leave the Sadhu because it was, what they thought,
the proper thing to do. They acted based on their individual ethics. An individual
ethics is one’s own goal and/or vision. For the hikers, their goal was to reach the
sacred place, so they did not let the situation deter their goal. Eventually, they
accomplished their goal.
4. Are there moral dilemma confronted by the hikers?
A moral dilemma is a situation in which a person is torn between right or
wrong. It often forces the individual to decide which option he or she can live with,
but any outcomes are extremely important. The hikers encountered a moral
dilemma when they are forced to decide whether to sacrifice their goals in
exchange of saving the Sadhu, which in this case, was a stranger for them by
bringing him down the mountain and never reach their goal or abandon the man
to achieve their personal interest.
5. What if a cure for COVID19 is in Himalaya which is a petals of flowers but the said
petals won’t last long, will you save the Sadhu or secure the petals?
If it means, I can save a great number of people, then I would willingly
secure the petals. I know that it is morally wrong to abandon the Sadhu because
a life is at stake, however, we should also consider the many lives that the petals
can save. In this case, choosing the petals over saving the Sadhu is morally
acceptable because it produces the greatest good for the greatest number.