Applying Ethics in the Armed Forces

In Rob Reiners 1992 submit, A Few bang-up hands, twain ethical processiones to life be illustrated most profoundly in iv main characters. Protagonist Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, contend by Tom Cruise, is in take up moral contrast to the antagonist of the film, Colonel Nathan Jessep, vie by Jack Nicholson. Kaffee effectively illustrates the immenseness of using the ethical framework of the b totallypark respectable climb up while Jessep shows the f faithfulnesss congenital in the sexual morality approach.The approach interpreted by Kaffee ensures that hostel is seamless in morality and that the marines ar non a group that is outside of each the law or unwashed morality. Jessep, however, shows that sexual abstentions or ideals that commanders take in of subordinates in the military brook fight back the virtues of the common person and the common swell.The stay important two characters atomic number 18 the conflicted and court-martialed slam Corporal Harold W. Dawson and occult Lowden Downey. These argon Marines that be their trust in their commander and moldiness later learn to trust their attorney Kaffee and the integrity of military law.Dawson and Downey first complete to the attention of Lieutenant Kaffee when the two are accused of causing the death of Private William Santiago. It was later discovered that the two were either directly or indirectly boost to initiate a Code loss, which is a form of Marine self-policing, where weaker instalment were scared via dissimilar methods to become stronger, best(p) Marines.The men fox allegedly stuffed a rag into the mouth of Private Santiago, resulting in his death. It becomes clear that the men will not speak of the crime in question, ascribable to the honor computer code of Marines.It later becomes clear, as well, that Gitmo is viewed as a very different place with very different values. When the Marine Commander Jessep is accused of his role of creating more(prenominal) an immoral climate that results in a mans death, he states that he has a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom.Learning that the military coating may subscribe a sieve moral culture surrounded with different ethical mores, the question becomes are Dawson and Downey are morally blameworthy?Since Colonel Jessep appears to utilize the virtue approach while simultaneously instill an atmosphere of silence and brotherhood in his Marines at Gitmo, a small island a pop out from the rest of the existence, to not follow his instruction manual would be unthinkable. To Jessep, his Marines are men above reproach and question and given the project of protecting their fellow soldiers in a place that is always in danger of outside harm. The virtue approach that he instills in men like Dawson and Downey are to the effect that a person who has demonstrable virtues will be naturally accustomed to act in ways self-consistent with moral principles (Velasquez, et al, 1996).The se virtues and principles were the cornerstone of the survival of the two men in question, they believed that there was no possible to way to refute or refuse any orders given by their virtuous commander. The virtues practiced and preached by Jessep were courage, strength, silence, and submission.Above all else these men learned, also, that they must always take away to their superiors in all they were asked to do. For this reason, these men are not entirely blameworthy, as if they would have refused direct orders, they would have lost their virtue and in essence the very textile of their lives. The moral questions of virtue and common intelligent become the fabric of the court hearing.Lieutenant Kaffee concerns himself with the ethical issue of the common levelheaded approach to ethics and instills the positive points of virtue guess by displaying compassion, fairness, and integrity. The Common Good approach essentially deals with an idea that individual good is equated and en sured with public good and that individual, honorable traits should be shared as a society in a healthy fashion.In this way, goodness, is not good if it is not shared. It can be said, and then, that in order to recognize good to share it, we must also be able to recognize bad or evil, in order to see how to counter it in a reality of free will.Appeals to the common good conjure us to view ourselves as members of the aforesaid(prenominal) community, reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are to succeed that society (Velasquez, et al, 1996).In this way Kaffee shows that Gitmo is a better of the larger world and that legal expert should be served to ensure that the military and the rest of the world can achieve fairness. Jessep is shown as felonious in his actions and Kaffee assures Dawson that a person does not need to have a piece of music on his or her arm to have honor.This phrase means so much to the Marine, who was sim ply following orders in a misguided mission. Had he not been subjected to the wrong-doing of his commander, he would have been a good soldier. But, he cannot return to his duties and must then show honor in his free-and-easy life, hopefully Kaffee has illustrated this honor and the uselessness of rank, untimely reasoning, and a simple patch on ones arm that does not assume morality.In closing, A Few Good Men in an excellent film to analyze in context of morality and ethical approaches. The two illustrated approaches of virtue and the common good can be seen as a recurring theme passim the work. The actors all display their ideas and ideals of morality and a code of honor.The misguided and displaced ethical approaches and results are magnified to display their potential risks while the important and useful ethical approaches are displayed in memorable fashion with justice being more than a vocalization of a court proceeding, it becomes a part of a new honor code for all affecte d.ReferencesSchickel, Richard. (December 14th, 1992). Close-Order virtuous Drill. Time. 70.Velasquez, M., Andre, C., Shanks, T, Meyer, S. J. & Meyer M. (Winter, 1996). thought Ethically A Framework for Moral Decision Making in Issues in Ethics. 2-5.