On a TV show, an army surgeon performed an unnecessary operation on a battalion commander merely to remove him from battle during the time he would need to recuperate from the surgery. As a result of over-aggressiveness, battalion commander had an abnormally high casualty rate among his men, and the surgeon knew that by performing the operation he would probably save the lives of hundreds of soldiers who otherwise would have been victims of the commander's eagerness. A fellow surgeon counseled him that it was unethical to operate on a healthy body even under those circumstances. But the operating surgeon, feeling that more good than bad would come out of his action, performed the operation anyway.

Evaluative questions to answer:

To what extent do you feel each surgeon was right in his moral position? Do you feel that in this case the good end justified the means the operating surgeon was using? Why or why not? Is there ever a time when a good end justifies any means used to attain it? If so, when? If not, why not?