ABSTRACT
In this paper, the authors attempt to interpret the findings of research on moral dilemmas involved in decisions on whether and how to react to physical aggression targeted at either the respondent or another person. The research was conducted on groups of military university applicants and military university students (undergoing basic training), including students in the medical degree program. The findings reveal significant differences between the respondent groups in terms of their assessment of the ethicality and effectiveness of defense measures taken in self-defense, as well as in defending others against a physical assault. Based on these findings, the authors propose the following conclusions: in the face of physical violence, moral judgment (i.e. moral evaluation of the method of defense adopted) depends primarily on the target of the assault (whether the respondent or a stranger) and on the respondents’ prior engagement in social activism.
