← All dilemmas
🐀morality
You sit on the ethics board reviewing a promising cancer therapy. To reach human trials, it must first be tested on animals that will suffer and be killed. Your vote is the deciding one.
Vote to reveal how SplitVote voters split.
YOUR CHOICE
OR
Anonymous voting. No account required. Results update in real time.
Why this dilemma matters
Moral dilemmas like this expose a gap between what feels principled and what feels workable. Choosing “Approve it. Reducing human suffering and death outweighs the harm to lab animals” prioritises consistency with one rule; choosing “Reject it. Medical progress bought with caged, engineered suffering crosses a line we shouldn't” gives more weight to attention to specific consequences.
Worth asking yourself
- Which value should matter more here?
- Would you defend this choice to someone affected by it?
More Morality Dilemmas
- A runaway trolley is heading toward 5 people. You can pull a lever to divert it — but it will kill 1 person instead.
- You discover a cure for cancer, but it only works if you keep the formula secret — sharing it would destroy the compound's effectiveness forever.
- A pill erases all your painful memories — but also the lessons you learned from them. You become happier but more naive.
- Your child is dying and needs medicine you cannot afford. You could steal it. The store owner is not evil — just running a business.