Well, you probably should have used a different title, because (caution, here comes the wisenheimer) a moral dilemma describes the necessity to decide between two solutions, which both have a moral value, and thus settle on one particular moral level. Say for example your job is to watch a dam next to a hospital, because the wheather is really bad and it could burst. But you can see from your position, that the dam near your house, where your wife and your kid are, could fail. You have no opportunity to contact anyone. Do you abandon your post and endanger the hospital and its patients to run to your house? Or do you hope the dam near your house holds?
That is a moral dilemma (according to Kohlberg for example).
Now you have two positions, depending on your intentions:
Deciding between option a (be faithful to your girlfriend) or b (follow your own sexual drive and leave your girlfriend because of it) is a decision between a normal level of moral (a) and a level of moral that an educational scientist would attribute on a social level to a one to five year old (b), which leaves two possibilities: 1. you're unfit to live a life of reason or high moral value or 2. you have no morals but are still living in a learning state to acquire moral standards.
Deciding between option a (be faithful to your girlfriend) or b (follow your own sexual drive and betray your girlfriend but don't leave her) is a decision between a normal level of moral (a) and a decision described as amoral or anomic behaviour (b) which again leaves two possibilities: 1. you're unfit to live a life of reason or high moral value or 2. you have no morals.
As you see option b as a possible choice in a moral dilemma and probably are an adult above the age of 18, I'd say possibility 2 is the most likely one. Question is whether it will be the 2 with responsibility or without.
Ok, there's your answer science-style.
That is a moral dilemma (according to Kohlberg for example).
Now you have two positions, depending on your intentions:
Deciding between option a (be faithful to your girlfriend) or b (follow your own sexual drive and leave your girlfriend because of it) is a decision between a normal level of moral (a) and a level of moral that an educational scientist would attribute on a social level to a one to five year old (b), which leaves two possibilities: 1. you're unfit to live a life of reason or high moral value or 2. you have no morals but are still living in a learning state to acquire moral standards.
Deciding between option a (be faithful to your girlfriend) or b (follow your own sexual drive and betray your girlfriend but don't leave her) is a decision between a normal level of moral (a) and a decision described as amoral or anomic behaviour (b) which again leaves two possibilities: 1. you're unfit to live a life of reason or high moral value or 2. you have no morals.
As you see option b as a possible choice in a moral dilemma and probably are an adult above the age of 18, I'd say possibility 2 is the most likely one. Question is whether it will be the 2 with responsibility or without.
Ok, there's your answer science-style.