The dilemma problem, as presented by Philippa Foot in her paper, “Moral Dilemmas Revisited”, is the question of whether it is possible to find oneself in a situation in which one cannot avoid doing a wrong choice. Foot argues that it is always possible to avoid making a bad choice in a difficult situation. It presents the ideas of multiple philosophers and their defense of the thought that there are situations in which you can and will make a bad choice. Foot further defends himself in explaining his point. She is presented with many opinions that involve a person still feeling guilty after a decision has been made. In this article I will show and defend Foot's argument that it is always possible to avoid making a bad choice in a difficult situation because feelings of guilt do not have to coincide with real remorse or symbolize a bad decision. To better understand Foot's position on remorse, one must first understand the problem of the dilemma itself. One situation exemplified in his article was a story where you promised a friend that you would meet him, but instead you have to drive someone to the hospital forcing you to break your promise. The idea here is that you are forced to make the decision to break a promise to a friend or leave someone who needs a ride to the hospital to fend for themselves. Foot believes that "obviously he or she should, all things considered, do the driving rather than the meeting." (Foot 3). This is an obvious answer for Foot, because he believes that there is always a right choice in a situation and that you shouldn't feel guilt, sadness or remorse about making your choice as long as you've made the right one. Foot cites several philosophical writers who agree that it is possible...... middle of paper ......d believes that those who believe in negative emotions after a decision would also believe that an apology after breaking a promise it is always necessary. Foot doesn't believe you should apologize for your choices because you believed they were the right ones; doesn't believe you owe the person anything other than an explanation of what happened to break the promise. (Foot 3). So, as long as you had a justifiable reason for breaking a promise, you didn't make the wrong choice, and therefore you shouldn't feel a residual emotion of regret or sadness that actually causes you to regret the choice. Foot shows that the remaining emotions that other writers have talked about are unnecessary, and shows that the choices presented may be difficult, but there is a right choice, and if one is sure of that right choice, one will not feel guilty about the decision..