Phindile: Jan, I personally side with Raina on this because I feel that utilitarianism does not fully explain the ‘why’ in this situation. I think that political philosophy explains it though, to be specific libertarianism. “Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others.” (According to Libertarianism: A Primer by David Boaz, Free Press, 1997). In this situation if the definition is applied, Marilyn chose to be jettisoned, the pilot never actually forced her to leave the ship and in fact he tried all he knew of to make sure Marilyn did not have to choose what the law required of him to do. Mr. Cross: Even though he did not force her out of the …show more content…
That law was made to prevent pilots from not having any other choice than death. It is a law made to warn of what nature will force the pilots to do and cold nature of the frontier and the ship’s resources. Lady Raina: Marilyn was forced to make the decision she made by the pilot, he carried a gun. Jan Narveson: The pilot chose his job but he has no choice over his obligations. His job requires him to be as objective as his surroundings. His carrying a weapon is not forcing anyone, he put it down when he saw Marilyn. Jan Narveson: Only Marilyn has freedom of choice in this situation, the pilot is bound by his job (has no choice) if he did not do what his job required of him, he would die too. Marilyn’s choice does not really affect her much she does not know anyone in the group. Phindile: It his choice to die though if he keeps Marilyn on board the ship. What if Gerry Cross was actually in group one? That would change everything, because Marilyn like the pilot will both be restrained by something. If Marilyn stayed on board her brother, Barton, and the rest of Group One would be killed. Mr. Cross: Do you think Marilyn’s life should have been …show more content…
If we look at it from the utilitarian view it only makes sense for Marilyn to be sacrificed. .“The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one” (Leonard Nimoy's Spock in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan). If we look at it from a libertarian point of view Marilyn chose to be a stowaway knowing that stowaways are punished and she chose to jump off the ship herself. No one forced her to do anything, she just wanted something which was to see her brother and she went to get it at the risk of everyone else. Jan Narveson: Overall you think Marilyn’s death is justified by her choices? Phindile: Yes Barista (on loudspeaker): Excuse me, the coffee shop is closing in ten minutes if you would please gather your belongings and exit soon. It was a pleasure to have you at Lee’s Tea Shop, we hope you have a great evening. Mr. Cross: Morally Jan, you think the principle of utility justifies what happened to Marilyn and Phindile you think that Marilyn’s life should not have been spared because she made choices that led her to her death. It was interesting to hear both opinions I hope we can continue this conversation later since the shop seems to be closing in a few minutes. Jan Narveson: I would love to continue our sessions and again my
“The stowaway was not a man—she was a girl in her teens, standing before him in little white gypsy sandals, with the top of her brown, curly head higher than his shoulder, with a faint, sweet scent of perfume coming from her, her smiling face tilted up so her eyes could look unknowing and unafraid into his as she waited for his answer.” Barton, the pilot has the internal conflict having Marilyn jettisoned and saving the six dying people on Woden. Barton wants to save the dying people on Woden, and he also wants to save Marilyn but he has to one. His choice was to have Marilyn jettisoned. Marilyn is such a sweet and nice girl but Barton has to save the people on Woden, he lets Marilyn stay on the ship for a while and talk to her brother ( which was her intent ) Eventually, he had to jettison her because he has to balance the cold equation in order to save the people in time on
Mr. Billy Bishop was an ace World War One pilot who was extremely devoted to being a pilot. Billy was a man who was loyal and courageous. The young, gentle, Canadian man was devoted to what he did, Bishop would practice flying and shooting all the time. “You’ve got to be good enough to get him in the first few bursts, so practice your shooting as much as you can. After patrols between patrols, on your day off. If I get a clear shot at a guy, he’s dead.” (Pg. 69) Billy was a role model for his devotion ...
Eliza’s blatant disregard for the concern of those around her contributed heavily to her demise. Had she listened to her friends and family when they told her to marry Mr...
was now Mrs. Logan Killicks, and she was somewhat obligated to do what he wanted.
Within each of the books the pilots had egos, but they had two different types, the military test pilots in The Right Stuff had an attitude displaying a fearless warrior as t...
lived in demanded her to give up her conspirator or bear the consequences of the
therefore the woman has no choice but to follow. "He knows there is no reason
Mill's moral theory is not accurately described. It remains recognizably utilitarian. According to Skorupski, he believes that the “mental, moral, and aesthetic stature”4 is capable for human nature, according to Mill. Utility has a place when Mill states that the greatest of interests is not normally classed “under the head of interest.” 5
Commanders are given their positions because they have demonstrated their ability to execute sound judgment. Judgment is the key factor when committing to actions that could be either favorable or disastrous, or anything in between. Moral decision making, however, takes more than sound judgment when complex problems with undiscernible outcomes arise. When developing leaders to understand decision making in high-stress or combat situations, a thorough understanding of moral judgment is warranted. Case studies provide leaders with valuable tools to stimulate thinking and challenge subordinates. When evaluating the decision the commander of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) has to make, understanding the difference between moral dilemmas and
The ‘Trolley Car Problem’ has sparked heated debates amongst numerous philosophical and jurisprudential minds for centuries. The ‘Trolley Car’ debate challenges one’s pre-conceived conceptions about morals, ethics and the intertwined relationship between law and morality. Many jurisprudential thinkers have thoroughly engaged with this debate and have consequentially put forward various ideologies in an attempt to answer the aforementioned problem. The purpose of this paper is to substantiate why the act of saving the young, innocent girl and resultantly killing the five prisoners is morally permissible. In justifying this choice, this paper will, first, broadly delve into the doctrine of utilitarianism, and more specifically focus on a branch
This was, however, not the only factor to be looked after. What options they had does not dictate the morality of an act, it is only one part of a larger whole. Law is, in itself, morality, by nature of the fact that to defy law results in chaos. Originally the law was created to serve as a means of carrying out Justice, but the sheer nature of the fact that it has since, as in this case, acted in some way other than to uphold such a concept proves that it is a separate entity unto itself. Rather than considering the morality of a decision in the administering of Justice, it is now reasonable and required to consider the law as a factor in determining the morality of a decision. When the virtue of the decision is determined, then can Justice, and thus punishment, be considered. It is important to understand this concept: law is no longer a means of carry...
In John Stuart Mill’s literature (575-580), he describes a system of ethics which he dubs as Utilitarianism. Mill’s Utilitarianism is unique because it is a Consequentialist theory – it focuses on the consequences of things, rather than individual processes involved. In other words, Mill argues that, for an action to be morally correct, it must solely contribute towards benefitting the greater good and maximizing humanity’s happiness. I argue that this ethical theory is flawed and cannot be used as a standard to gauge the morality of our actions because, since Utilitarianism is so entrenched on the outcomes that are produced, it has the potential to sanction clearly wrong actions, so long as they promote the general welfare. In this critique,
In addition, those potentially nearing the end of their life may be asked a DNR, or “Do Not Resuscitate,” Order. This states that in a life-threatening emergency where one is facing possible death, no actions shall be done try and “resuscitate” the individual in an attempt to restore life to the person. However, if a DNR Order is not filled out, actions including CPR, or cardiopulmonary resuscitation, mechanical ventilation, h...
Whether Maggie Fitzgerald’s decision to die is ethically acceptable or not cannot be determined because James Rachels never mentions the ethicality
Throughout history, there have been constant power struggles between men and women, placing the male population at a higher position than the female. Therefore, in this patriarchal system women have always been discriminated against simply due to the fact that they are women. Their rights to vote, to be educated and essentially being treated equally with men was taken away from them and they were viewed as weak members of society whose successes depend on men. However, this has not prevented them from fighting for what they believe in and the rights they are entitled to. On the contrary, it has motivated them to try even harder and gain these basic societal rights through determination and unity. In Mariama Bâ’s book, “So Long a Letter”, the