utilitarianism and deontology explained, now we can apply them to fictional scenarios. One kind of scenarios is moral dilemmas. These dilemmas are full of paradoxes, most include harm to one group of characters and one action could transfer the harm to another group. The most well-known moral dilemma is probably “The trolley problem”. In this story, a trolley that cannot be stopped is going to run over five people. The good news is, if someone pulls the brake, the track under would be switched to aside. Nevertheless, another person is tied on the track as well, if the person making decision wants to save five people, the redirected trolley would kill him. In general, is one life less valuable than five? For utilitarians, killing the one person does not seem to bother them. As mentioned before, utilitarianism is about maximising the happiness. Saving five lives would be more important for increasing pleasure overall. In Crockett’s (2016) explanation, “The utilitarian perspective dictates that most appropriate action is the one that achieves the greatest good for the greatest number.” Although killing one person seems wrong, the consequence of saving 5 lives would make it moral in utilitarianism. In contrary, deontology insists for no matter what reason, performing murder is always immoral and against basic principles. Crockett (2016) stated that from deontological point of view, killing is simply wrong, even if it brings benefit. Deontologists argue that human lives can definitely not be used as the means to an end, which means lives cannot be used as tools for an desired outcome. To summarise, morality theories disagree with each other in this dilemma. This conflict shows how different morality theories set various standards for what is moral as well.