Steve Gimbel has a post entitled Moral Dilemma at Philosopher’s Playground. Here is a taste:
I often get asked the old question whether you can teach character and if not what is the point of teaching ethics. I don’t think you can train people to do what they should do, especially not at the college level, but then I also don’t think that is the purpose of teaching ethics. Doing the right thing is a two-step process: (1) figure out the right thing to do, and (2) do it. Only step (2) has to do with character. Step (1) is the one I can address in the classroom.
I don’t disagree with the thrust of this remark, but the assertion that only "do[ing] the right thing" "has to do with character" is at least controversial. For example, the neoaristotelian position is that "figur[ing] out the right thing to do" is in part a matter of "moral vision" or "practical wisdom" and that these are, in turn, a function of character. But even if one rejects this argument, "figuring out the right thing to do" is itself an action, which must be "done," which can be done rightly or wrongly. But this is all just a matter of quibbles. Read Gimbel’s post.