Utilitarianism In The Movie Collateral Sacrifice

908 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Other opinions about ethics in war

“Collateral damage” seems like a nice term for manslaughter. The question is, is it morally acceptable to kill innocent people because of the war? Is killing innocent victims inevitable especially in a war-torn country and where militants can roam freely? Is it ethically acceptable to sacrifice the lives of the people for the sake of greater good? Who gets the blame when innocent lives are taken? The decision by Colonel Powell to shoot the militants with a collateral damage of a one innocent life was an act of utilitarianism. Per Professor Reeve, utilitarianism is a school of thought that “holds than an action is right if it produces, or if it tends to produce, the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people affected by the action. Otherwise, the action is wrong.” The order from Colonel Powell is for the greater good because if the government misses the opportunity to kill the militants, the U.S/British government might not have a chance to arrest or kill them. The Colonel’s decision to bomb them is for the sake of the people who may be targeted by the suicide bombers. The school of thought, utility “requires us to compare the present short term with the future long run”. The killing of the militants’ present short term is sacrificing an …show more content…

In the movie, the duty of the governments is to kill the militants, if arrest is not possible. There are two possible consequences of the duty: killing the militants while sacrificing the life of an innocent girl or letting the terrorists kill a lot of people in a mall through suicide bombing. The goal from the start is to capture the militants, or kill them on the spot if capturing is not possible. The decision of Colonel Powell to drop the bomb even if there will be a collateral damage emphasizes the duty of the US and British governments. This action “justifies the mean” because killing the militants will save a lot of people in the

Show More
Related

  • The Pros And Cons Of Dropping The Atomic Bomb

    1246 Words  | 3 Pages

    We agree that, whatever be one’s judgment of the war in principle, the surprise bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally indefensible. The “8 Primary Pros and Cons of Dropping the Atomic Bomb” People also say how Japan was already defeated, concluding why the bombs were unnecessary. Although, many others say that the dropping of the atomic bombs saved their lives, but the debate over the decision to drop the atomic bomb will never be resolved. The war against Japan bestowed the Allies with entirely new problems as they encountered an enemy with utterly unfamiliar tactics.

    Read More

  • Sympathy In Tim O Brien's The Things They Carried

    593 Words  | 2 Pages

    He attempts to justify his reasoning by saying, “There were no thoughts about killing. The grenade was to make him go away—just evaporate—and I leaned back and felt my mind go empty and then felt it fill up again. I had already thrown the grenade before telling myself to throw it” (TTTC, 126). Nonetheless, even then, the guilt does not rid itself from his thoughts, and this is the type of realization, ending someone’s life, and witnessing all the gore, is what continually haunts soldier. This is also one of the concepts that overly patriotic people who have never been to war yet indulge themselves in political affairs fail or refuse to

    Read More

  • Why the Atomic Bomb Was the Wrong Choice

    1354 Words  | 3 Pages

    World War II played host to some of the most gruesome and largest mass killings in history. From the start of the war in 1939 until the end of the war in 1945 there were three mass killings, by three big countries on those who they thought were lesser peoples. The rape of Nanking, which was carried out by the Japanese, resulted in the deaths of 150,000 to 200,000 Chinese civilians and POW. A more well-known event was of the Germans and the Holocaust. Hitler and the Nazi regime persecuted and killed over 500,000 Jews. This last country may come as a surprise, but there is no way that someone could leave them out of the conversation. With the dropping of the Atomic bombs the United States killed over 200,000, not including deaths by radiation, in the towns of Nagasaki and Hiroshima and ultimately placed the United States in the same group as the Japanese and the Germans. What are the alternatives other than dropping the two A-bombs and was it right? The United States and President Truman should have weighed their opting a little bit more before deciding to drop both atomic bombs on the Islands of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. In the case of dropping the atomic bombs the United States did not make the right decision. This essay will explain through logic reasoning and give detailed reasons as to why the United States did not make the right choice.

    Read More

  • Michael Walzer, 'Noncombatant Immunity And Military Necessity'

    1019 Words  | 3 Pages

    Why harm innocent people who just happen to be involved in the war by association? Why kill a lone soldier who is simply a sitting duck in a shooting range? This is “no other term than murder”, and the nature of necessity here is not viable. The question then that comes to mind for me is how do we constitute the difference between an armed and dangerous soldier who has been trained to kill and fight off enemies as compared to the people who work in the factories to develop the war materials that enable these soldiers to be killing machines? Should these people also be harmed for their contributions to the war effort?

    Read More

  • Was The Atomic Bomb Justified

    805 Words  | 2 Pages

    In contrast, Maier and Selden’s thesis claims the act of dropping the atomic bomb was completely justifiable and not a war crime is the counter argument. Since, both authors address the fact that the world was at war and that aerial bombing was not something new, however, the technology advances were. In addition, their logic is reasonable because at the time of World War II almost everyone was using strategic and tactical aerial bombing, not to mention the Allies wanted to end the war as soon as possible. Thus, the atomic bomb was justifiable, however, it was a war crime. The objective of the tactical bombing was to aim at military targets it achieves its objective, however, killing thousands of lives in the process. The statement by Maier

    Read More

  • Examples Of Utilitarianism: Dropping The Bomb

    1287 Words  | 3 Pages

    Both sides of the war had suffered tremendous losses and the numbers would have continued to grow over the course of the war. By choosing to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, I believe the lives saved in the long run outweigh the initial number of lives lost. There is no way to put a price of one human life against another, but the total number of deaths prevented could have been multitudes compared to the hundred thousand killed in the atomic blasts. From the numbers alone, I support President Truman’s utilitarian

    Read More

  • On Utilitarianism

    1122 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Utilitarianism, J.S. Mill gives an account for the reasons one must abide by the principles of Utilitarianism. Also referred to as the Greatest-happiness Principle, this doctrine promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. More specifically, Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, holding that the right act is that which yields the greatest net utility, or "the total amount of pleasure minus the total amount of pain", for all individuals affected by said act (Joyce, lecture notes from 03/30).

    Read More

  • Hiroshima Argumentative Essay

    1114 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...tive. You cannot have war without sacrifices and using an Atomic Bomb proves it. Dropping the bomb was the only option with the least amount backfire that would occur. This decision was like a double edged sword and dropping the bomb on civilians was the sacrifice that we made. The bomb did save lives in the end, not having to have more war and just simply to end it was why chose to end the war that way. Although we had to drop the bomb, the lives of the people that were taken by the bomb were not in vain. Continuation of the war was only going to cause twice as more of death than what the bomb had done. Sometimes you need to go to a certain extent to have something accomplished especially in war. Whether it be to kill innocents by a bomb or having to tear families apart by sending their loved ones overseas those are the consequences of war, those are sacrifices.

    Read More

  • The Theme Of Sacrifice In Saving Private Ryan

    876 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the film Saving Private Ryan, directed by Steven Spielberg, Captain John Miller takes his men behind enemy lines to find Private John Ryan. Private Ryan’s three brothers have been killed in the war and no one knows if Private Ryan is alive or not. Captain Miller takes on the challenge of bringing home Ryan to his Mom so she wouldn’t lose all of her sons in the dreaded war. The story follows the journey and hardships Captain Miller and his men face trying to locate and bring home Private Ryan. Spielberg portrays the theme of sacrifice in the scenes when the group almost splits apart, they find Private Ryan, and Captain Miller dies.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism Essay

    842 Words  | 2 Pages

    Utilitarianism is zdefined, as the right way to act is one that maximizes your happiness, (pleasure and happiness is the absence of pain) while the wrong way is one that produces the opposite i.e. pain. Unhappiness here is defined as pain or the opposite of happiness. This is the basis of utilitarianism or what Mill calls the “greatest happiness principle” and it is the best ethical theory by which humans should follow. The argument for the above is as follows

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism

    2011 Words  | 5 Pages

    The most important question of all is what should one do since the ultimate purpose of answering questions is either to satisfy curiosity or to decide which action to take. Complicated analysis is often required to answer that question. Beyond ordinary analysis, one must also have a system of values, and the correct system of values is utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • Ronald Takakis Hiroshima

    2111 Words  | 5 Pages

    The official reason given for dropping the bomb was to bring a quick end to tht war and save American lives. However, Takaki presents many different explanations as to why the decision to use the bomb was made. He disagrees with the popular belief that the decision to use the bomb was made solely to quickly end the war in the Pacific and to save American lives. Takaki presents theories such as international concerns, American sentiment, and racism in an attempt to more fully explain why this decision was made.

    Read More

  • The Utilitarian Argument

    1453 Words  | 3 Pages

    The utilitarian argument can also be used to say that hESC research and use is unethical. This philosophy has a viewpoint that considers the right action to be the one that does the greater good ( ). You could say curing people with disease or injuries are a good thing to do. But would it be the best thing to do? Wouldn’t having a whole new life from birth be better than curing an eighty-year-old Alzheimer’s patient? Using that example, the greater good would be not to use embryos for research. Another question utilitarianism uses asks to determine morality is what will happen as a consequence of doing something. One consequence of using embryos would be that a life is ended before birth. A whole life would be ended before

    Read More

  • Justification Of Hiroshima And Nagasaki Bombings

    931 Words  | 2 Pages

    ]. They had to weigh carefully the present and future costs and benefits for the American people. They decided to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The choice they made was justifiable.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism

    1254 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are many essays, papers and books written on the concept of right and wrong. Philosophers have theorized about moral actions for eons, one such philosopher is John Stuart Mill. In his book Utilitarianism he tries to improve on the theories of utilitarianism from previous philosophers, as he is a strong believer himself in the theory. In Mill's book he presents the ideology that there is another branch on the utilitarian tree. This branch being called rule-utilitarianism. Mill makes a distinction between two different types of utilitarianism; act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Rule-utilitarianism seems like a major advance over the simple theory of act-utilitarianism. But for all its added complexity, it may not actually be a significant improvement. This is proven when looking at the flaws in act-utilitarianism and relating them to the ways in which rule-utilitarianism tries to overcome them. As well one must look at the obstacles that rule-utilitarianism has on it's own as a theory. The problems of both act and rule utilitarianism consist of being too permissive and being able to justify any crime, not being able to predict the outcomes of one's actions, non-universality and the lose of freewill.

    Read More

More about Utilitarianism In The Movie Collateral Sacrifice

Open Document