Final answer:
Considering Kohlberg's stages of moral development, stealing to save a life without compensation falls within the third level of moral maturity, which recognizes the value of human life over material gain. Option C.
Step-by-step explanation:
The moral dilemma you've presented, where an individual steals something to save a stranger's life without compensation, can be best understood through the lens of Kohlberg's stages of moral development. Kohlberg would categorize this action within the third level of moral maturity, which is post-conventional morality.
This level involves making decisions based on universal principles of justice and the intrinsic value of human life, which transcend individual societies' laws and norms, illustrating that the preservation of life is of higher moral importance than the maintenance of property rights.
Responding to the scenarios you've described, one can draw conclusions about what is morally obligatory, permissible, or forbidden based on societal norms and the individual's moral compass.
Generally:
Flipping the switch to save five lives at the expense of one is seen as permissible owing to the principle of the greater good.
Rescuing a drowning child at the cost of ruining one's pants is considered obligatory due to the direct ability to prevent harm with minimal sacrifice.
Taking organs from a healthy person without consent is regarded as forbidden because it violates the individual's right to life and bodily autonomy.
In Philosophy, when ethical dilemmas arise, such as whether to tell the truth or protect a family member, decisions are frequently guided by balancing conflicting duties and considering the consequences of each action.
So Option C is the correct answer.