A Strange Case

Angela Compton

April 12, 2013

Our reading for this week for our continuation of normative ethics and who’s to say what’s right, came from the classic “Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” by Robert Louis Stevenson. 

The main character of the book, Dr. Jekyll finds himself becoming unable to control his “other” self, his “evil” self, Mr. Hyde as he was to able earlier in the story.  Hyde’s desire to be free of Dr. Jekyll and live out his evil tendencies grew, becoming even too powerful for the medicinal concoction that was previously able to keep him at bay. 

After fighting to keep Mr. Hyde hidden, Dr. Jekyll has come to the conclusion that he can fight no more, that before too long he would cease to exist and all that would remain was the murderous Mr. Hyde.  Upon this realization Dr. Jekyll decides that the only way to insure that Mr. Hyde would perish forever was to take his own life, committing suicide.  Herein lies the topic of our moral issue. 

As a doctor Jekyll was held to an oath of protecting life, not taking it.  Not only that but due to his religious convictions he also felt it was morally wrong to take a life, especially your own.  These were part of Jekyll’s virtue ethics that he had used to make the ethical decisions of his life.  But now he was making a decision that went against everything he had previously thought or believed.  Does that mean that his decision to commit suicide was wrong?

Dr. Jekyll knew that what dwelled within him was nothing but pure evil and was growing stronger.  Mr. Hyde had already committed that immoral act of murder once, how could Jekyll be certain that he would not do it again?  He couldn’t say for sure but from the internal feelings he was having he knew it most likely would happen again, but when?  Dr. Jekyll didn’t want to take the chance to find out.  He changed from a virtue based ethics approach to a consequential based ethics approach when coming to his decision, more specifically the act of ethical altruism.  The act could be considered morally right because the action is going to benefit the people of London by protecting them from Mr. Hyde and in turn not benefitting Dr. Jekyll because he is ultimately losing his life.  Though I guess in a small way Dr. Jekyll is receiving the benefit of being free of Mr. Hyde and the evil that was destroying him from the inside out.  However, I don’t think that his benefit is enough to outweigh the overwhelmingly positive outcome to the people of London. 

            So, who’s to say that the decision that Dr. Jekyll was immoral or not?  As I have stated before, only the person making the decision can ultimately dictate their own morality based on how they were raised, what they believe, if they feel it is their duty or the consequences involved.  You cannot force your own beliefs on someone else.  You can only hope and pray that they have the moral aptitude to make the “right” choices even if they may not be right to you or me.    

Simpler, Steven. "Who's To Say What's Right?" Classical Categories (2013): n. pag. Web. 22 Mar. 2013.

Stevenson, Robert. Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde . New York: W.W Norton & Company, Inc., 1850. Print.