Ethics and “A Few Good Men” Essay

The movie is near two leathernecks indicted for the execution of a associate leatherneck in their platoon. common pass prototypal Class (perfluorocarbon) William capital of Chile died because of lactic acidosis trigge redness by the assault inflicted by Lance sensible Harold Dawson and clubby Lowden Downey. This assault was the publication of a direct grade by the platoon commander Lieutenant Kendrick. The ordain was to convey capital of Chile to think of the cypher of the oceans and the chain of command. Private capital of Chile had broken this chain and compose directly to the NIS asking for a transfer, in exchange for offering breeding roughly an il judicial beleaguer-line dead reckoning. When Col unriv tout ensembleedl Nathan Jessep, commander of the maritimes stati adeptd in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, intentional of this letter, he straddleed the educate of Private capital of Chile.In Guantanamo Bay, this retarding was referred to as necessitate outon violent, which was defined as the field of operations of oceans deep down the unit, by the unit, without involving the proper politics navy Jag corp. When the navy intentional of Private capital of Chile?s death, Dawson and Downey were laid infra ar moderation, and moved to Washington DC to be judicatory- martialed. After a natural litigation by defense attorney, Lt. Danial Kaffee, the court found Colonel Jessep and Lt. Kendrik guilty of the murder of perfluorocarbon capital of Chile because they ordered the ? jurisprudence redness?. Dawson and Downey were cle bed of hastes of murder and conspiracy to bless murder, but were found guilty of top unbecoming a marine, and were discharged from the marine Corp.6. Normative Ethical QuestionDid Dawson and Downey do the right thing by inframentioned the order?Dawson and Downeys actions were in inexorable accordance with the orders given to them by their platoon commander, and were t presentof justified.The Marines be cunn ingve, You follow orders or people die. This was in general applicable during wartime when questioning an order trickister cause the lives of the marine and his fellow soldiers. Although taciturn for wartime, the marines in their day-to-day phalanx spiritedness exert this be breathef. So when time comes for the marines to go to war, the thought of questioning an order neer crosses their mind regardless of the severity of the order. pastimeorders given by a excellent policeman is a part of the marine discipline, and breaking this discipline is non tolerated in armed forces.The order given to Dawson and Downey was to consider perfluorocarbon Santiago. Santiagos aggravate total condition was the primary flat coat of his death, and Dawson and Downey having followed their order were unfortunate to find Santiago dead in the training process. Had Santiago been physic totallyy mate, he would retain in all cargonlihood, survived the training.However on the charge of becoming a united adduces marine they were found guilty as charged. The reason for this is as followsDawson and Downey should let ignored the Code rosy-cheeked ordered by Colonel Jessup, and should birth reported him to the proper governance at the navy Jag Corp.The training as well as crawl inn as the Code bolshy was known to sustain harmful consequences. in that location were two ensamples of the severity of the Code rosy shown in the movie The premiere example was that of Private Bell, a soldier, getting cypher but water for a point of one week to keep him alive. The gage example snarled a soldier been given a Code redness for dropping a gun during a training exercise. His penalization was to put gum on his hands, and have his arm punched for to the highest degree twenty minutes. Evidently, a Code Red in armed services parlance basebornt punishment in its higher degree.PFC Santiago was known to be a fallible mortal. Dawson and Downey ignoring the fact that PFC Sa ntiagos condition was deteriorating still followed Col. Jessups order for Code Red on Santiago. They should have been aw atomic number 18 of the fact that Code Red would cause irreparable damage to PFC Santiagos wellness on homophileitarian grounds, Dawson and Downey should have contacted the proper authorities at the navy Jag Corp for a fair assessment of the order. look at it from a different perspective, Dawson and Downey would have been morally right to have drop the order given to them by their superior. However, they were leaping to their occupation overriding their dominate officers orders would have placed their line of achievement at s ascertain.This eveningt involves an good dilemma for the following reasons1. A murder has been committed. It is non delightful to take a human being life merely because this separate doesnt get along with the equaliser of the comp whatever.2. The probe of the murder is hindered. It is non grateful to untruth well-nigh the cause of death in an effort to preserve public relations or personal esteem.3. Cadets and officers roost infra oath in court. It is unacceptable to lie in court. The phalanx has determined that it is prerequisite this casing be investigated and prosecuted to the full expiration of the honor. A sub-group in the military cant decl ar its own rules of military morality.PFC Santiago is treated as a means rather than existence treated as an end.The murder was basal in every sand and those cause the murder should be punished to the fullest result of the practice of law. We still stipulate that it is unacceptable for a coverup of the murder. Colonel Nathan Jessup defends the practice of lying under an battlefield of lying cover by Plato.Plato gave abet for some lies when he said It is the communication channel of the rulers of the city, if it is anybodys, to tell lies, deceiving both its enemies and its own citizens for the attain of the city and no one else must touch this privilege.(1)If utilize the Plato type defense for the coverup, Jessup and those around him have a deluded superstar of their place in home(a) security. Their actions atomic number 18 non for the economy of military. Their actions and lies are for preservation of their own positionsThe responsibility of the commander to make sure his marines are prepared for any sort of danger from the enemy. Colonel Nathan Jessup claims that codered as a method of training for soldiers was the American modality. He defends the practice as that which is indispensable to defend the country. This reminds me of Plato?s figure of warriors where thither is no place for the shadowy or sick people.The all remnant between these two cases is that Plato would have non hesitated to propose euthanasia for such(prenominal) uncreative warriors. Colonel Jessup on the other(a) hand proposed to train them by using force if necessary. . However, he uses intense form of punishment for the tiniest mistakes and flaws. So he cannot be justify such a punishment in the get word of national security. But in at present?s veridicalism such practices are detested and are against humanitarian grounds and any form of confession for their practice is barbaric.Nathan Jessup (Jack Nicholson) is a military officer who has covered up a murder. When he is in court on the witness allow, Nicholson, yells, You requirement to know the truth? You want to know the truth? Well, you cant address the truth. Nicholsons testimony is that some military crimes must be covert for national security purposes. He implies that it is acceptable to murder one cadet who isnt tone ending along with the rest of the company. He states it is acceptable for him to lie about the incident under oath to protect the company involved as well as the military overall.Kant declares A lie is a liewhether it be told with honourable or baneful intentBut if a lie does no harm to anyone and no ones interests are affect ed by it, is it a lie? Certainly.(2) Kant deals truthfulness is a job, an unconditional duty which holds in all circumstances.(3) According to the vapid imperative, if there is heretofore one case in which it is acceptable to lie and honesty can be overridden, then the perfect status of the duty not to lie is compromised. Kant is most vociferous in not allowing for even a seemingly innocent lie, which could save a life instead of causing harm. He merely asserts that if something distasteful happens it is not your fault. The terrible act is something wholly unjustified in the first place.(4)Duty is often correspond by Kant and his deontological views on lying. Kant tells us that it is never acceptable to lie, and places this on the level ofa moral law, or a categorical imperative. He contends that lies always harm othersthe individual or society. To be truthful (honest) in all declarations, therefore, is a sacred and utterly commanding decree of reason, limited by no expedien cy.(5)Utilitarian Jeremy Bentham also would not allow for the Jessup defense of the coverup. Bentham delivered a glistering lecture to Englands judges who were using their power and lying to the people. Bentham sees nothing more than(prenominal) abhorrent than using lies and power to further ones position.(6)The justification for the behaviors is weak, with hundreds of years of morality, morals, and laws written in adversary to Jessups rationale.In the particular case of PFC Santiago, Colonel jessup seems to be aggravated by his appeal to the NIS and his breach of confidentiality of his unit. This brings us to the another(prenominal) moral debate. Was Santiago right in his decision to give ill-advised learning of an il jural fence line shooting? We can make two speculations here. either Santiago lied about the fence line shooting in a desperate attempt to get spy by the authorities which could get him transferred for the information or he was misinterpreted about the shooti ng. This is to say that he did not know that the mirror had engaged to fire first and Dawsen just retaliated in defence. Santiago can easily be forgiven for the latter.However, in the actor case, normatively he should not have do what he did. But that was the only applicatory thing he could do. Even though we can easily blame Santiago for lying, we should praise his attempt to break outdoor(a) from the blind acceptance of the principles which ruled the lives of other marines. Even though Santtiago was physically weaker than the rest of the Platoon he had the mental capacity to represent against the odds of the absurd life in which he was trying to survive. This reminds me of the mahabharatta where Lord Krishna taught the Pandavas that it is good to lie got the fight for the Good. (I know that Kant would not agree with me)In A hardly a(prenominal) Good Men the debate is one of to whom is the ultimate duty owed andwhere does the law fit into the equation? The soldiers facing co urt martial display their ultimate affiliation steadfastly?first and foremost their duty is to their marine corps god and country are secondary to the bond between their comrades and this is the fulcrum of the movie house are orders to be obeyed at all costs and where does the buck stop? professor Alfonso Gomez-Lobo quotes Neither can military ethics properly exist without the concept of ordering. By ordering, I do not mean telling subordinates what to do. I refer, instead, to moral structuring and respectable priorities. In the movie A hardly a(prenominal) Good Men, a Marine lance corporal tells his lawyers that the code is establish upon unit, corps, immortal, country. He has it, of course, all wrong. In fact, umteen illegal activities or stupid mistakes in the military services are the result of leaders failures to order wisely and well.The duty of a marine to follow the orders of a superior officer. The word duty here needs to be explained. It is the duty of the marine to fallow the orders of his superior officer if they are justified or legal. In Cuba however, declineing an order implies to commit a crime. But since Code red is a practice discouraged by law, it is the duty of the marine to disobey such an order. An officer is always human and to equate him to be the ultimate legal authority is to make him invincible. It is this act of fast one and blind corporate trust that lets the powerful exploit.When an sanctuary demands complete faith in its principles, the individuals within the institution are dependent on it, strive to maintain it and become incompetent of independent thinking. At times like these the ethical question crops us which is more important? guiding principles of life or humans, code of honour or PFC Santiago.As for the Platoons annoyance on Santiagos betrayal for the unit and selfishness, I applyt think it is valid. It would have been a different case had there been some compassion for Santiago within his Unit. His friends beat him up as a part of following orders, to keep up their jobs. From this perspective, they too are selfish. The only contravention is that Santiago istowards the receiving end of brutalities, and it is convenient for the rest of the Platoon who were comparably stronger to talk about the commitment within the unit.Interestingly, Lieutenant Kendrick too conceptualize in the proper authority of God or his commanding officer Colonel Nathan R JessupHere we see that blind faith is associated with both God and the ColonelMoreover, the Colonel starts associating himself with God who protects and punishes others and expects the respect of all. He thinks that he is the personification of legitimate unquestionable principles.That the colonel lives by the rules and notions of the Marine army corps and doesnt fully comprehend the world outside.Both Dawson and Kaffee are good at what they do. That?s all they have in common. The contrast between the disciplined Dawson and the light-minded Kaffee can be traced to their system of beliefs and their environment.Dawson mentions that he joined the navy so that he could live by a code. He believes that he did his duty and did it well and was even ready to face its consequences, but not plead guilty. Here we see the romanticized var. of the code of honor. He failed to realize that the real strength of character lies in his circumspection to protect the weak and not train him to protect himself. He lives in the misconceptions where certain principles appearDawson is like a person who wants to be religious and associates himself with religious practices no matter what they are which gives him a sense of satisfaction.Kaffee on the other hand has no delusions about the law. His only criterion is to figure out his case as soon as possible with the best interest of his knob at heart. He believes that a case is not won by the law but the lawyer. He seems to have disoriented his faith in all legal ethics due to the waylaw is practiced around him and he seems to be a part of the system too. Or in the least(prenominal) he has least to live with it.Daniel Kaffee is a smart, flippant, good- looking for youngish Navy lawyer. in his late 20s, 15 months out of Harvard Law School, and a brilliant legal mind wait for a courageous spirit to drive it. He is, at this point in his life, passionate about nothing debar maybe softball. His father was a famous jurist, and Dan feels the burden of his fathers reputation. Indeed, his casual, facetiously attitude to the law is his way of avoiding par with his father. You cant fail if you dont even try. However, he lived in the shadows of his father having no misconceptions regarding different facets of law. He does not believe in a romanticized version of his profession.He did not believe his case to be a success and first attempts to find an easy way out. Even though he sympathized with the state of his clients who were forced to carry out their orders, were blind by the belief in false practices like ?Code Red?, he understood the politics associated with the case. His frustration is revealed when he emphasizes that I think you will ache and it does not matter what I believe, it only matters what I can prove..Despite these flaws he proves to be an excellent lawyer. This is because unlike the marines. He has learnt to question authority. He has not been teach by blind principles.the lawyer support the two marines in A few Good Men has to consider whether he should go beyond the legal and ethical codes under which he is bound and accuse a witness on the stand of committing a crime for which the two marines are accused. He of course does and justice is done.In conclusion, it is evident that Dawson and Downey performed their duty as was judge of them. On ethical grounds, they would have been reform off notifying the appropriate authorities of the disposition of the order and the circumstances in which the order was to be executed. Howeve r, as fellowmarines under a commanding officer, they were compelled to follow orders without looking into the ethical or moral aspects of their actions. A marine?s discipline is taken very seriously by his commanding officers however, this does not imply that discipline takes anteriority over the mental and physical health of a marine. Santiago?s heart condition was no secret. Despite this fact, he was given the Code Red lettered fully well that he may not be able to take the pressure ? definitely, an unethical decision on the part of the authorities concerned.