Movies such as Pakula’s 1982 “Sophie’s Choice” and Eastwood’s 2024 “Juror #2” depict gut-wrenching moral dilemmas, where every decision is flawed and ethically unbearable.

Moral dilemmas arise when all available options are objectionable, involving transgressions against moral principles. Their resolution often revolves around the “Principle of the Lesser of Two Evils,” where one chooses the least harmful option.

In 1944, President Roosevelt’s health was rapidly deteriorating, and many in the Democratic Party believed he wouldn’t finish his term if re-elected. Despite this, Roosevelt ran for a fourth term but was pressured to find a different running mate with better economic and leadership skills. Vice President Henry Wallace was replaced by Harry Truman, a senator from Missouri, on the ticket.

Roosevelt won his fourth term but passed away less than three months into it, making Truman the 33rd President on 12 April 1945. Within four months, Truman faced the dilemma of dropping atomic bombs on Japan to possibly end World War II or continuing a more conventional war.

Although there were no initial estimates of fatalities before the bombings, aftermath estimates suggested that up to a quarter of a million lives were lost at Nagasaki and Hiroshima. In contrast, continuing the war conventionally was estimated to result in 6 to 11 million additional fatalities.

Truman chose the lesser of two evils: sacrificing a quarter of a million souls to save millions.

Source: Lesser Evil Principle by Dougherty, 2020, Encyclopedia of Business and Professional Ethics. Graphic: Grok Generated.