Applying Ethics in the Armed Forces

In Rob Reiners 1992 film, A Few Good custody, twain ethical go ones to life argon illustrated most profoundly in four main characters. Protagonist Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, played by tom turkey Cruise, is in direct lesson contrast to the antagonist of the film, Colonel Nathan Jessep, played by Jack Nicholson. Kaffee effectively illustrates the importance of using the ethical framework of the habituals just approach while Jessep shows the flaws inherent in the chastity approach.The approach taken by Kaffee ensures that auberge is seamless in morality and that the Marines be not a group that is outside of either the law or common morality. Jessep, however, shows that virtues or ideals that commanders demand of subordinates in the host can fight the virtues of the common person and the common exhaustively.The remaining important two characters ar the conflicted and court-martialed Lance Corporal Harold W. Dawson and Private Lowden Downey. These ar Marines that rested thei r trust in their commander and must later learn to trust their attorney Kaffee and the oneness of military law.Dawson and Downey first come to the attention of Lieutenant Kaffee when the two atomic number 18 accused of causing the death of Private William Santiago. It was later discovered that the two were either directly or indirectly encouraged to initiate a Code Red, which is a form of Marine self-policing, where weaker member were shake up via different methods to become stronger, better Marines.The hands have allegedly stuffed a rag into the mouth of Private Santiago, resulting in his death. It becomes clear that the hands leave alone not speak of the crime in question, due to the honor canon of Marines.It later becomes clear, as well, that Gitmo is viewed as a very different enjoin with very different values. When the Marine Commander Jessep is accused of his role of creating such an immoral climate that results in a mans death, he states that he has a greater respons ibility than you can possibly fthm.Learning that the military culture may have a separate 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 at the same time instilling an atmosphere of silence and brotherhood in his Marines at Gitmo, a small island apart from the rest of the world, to not follow his instructions would be unthinkable. To Jessep, his Marines are men above reproach and question and given the lying-in 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 developed virtues allow for be naturally disposed to act in ways conformable with moral principles (Velasquez, et al, 1996).These virtues and principles were the cornerstone of the survival of the two men in question, they believed that on that point was no possible to way to refute or refuse whatsoever 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 submit 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 wooly their virtue and in essence the very fabric of their lives. The moral questions of virtue and common good become the fabric of the court hearing.Lieutenant Kaffee concerns himself with the ethical cut of the common good approach to ethics and instills the positive points of virtue speculation by displaying compassion, fairness, and integrity. The Common Good approach essentially deals with an idea that various(prenominal) good is equated and ensured with public good and that individual, honorable traits should be shared as a community in a heal thy fashion.In this way, goodness, is not good if it is not shared. It can be said, then, that in order to recognize good to share it, we must also be able to recognize unstable or evil, in order to know how to counter it in a world of free will.Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the same community, reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are to achieve that society (Velasquez, et al, 1996).In this way Kaffee shows that Gitmo is a part of the larger world and that justness should be served to ensure that the military and the rest of the world can achieve fairness. Jessep is shown as culpable in his actions and Kaffee assures Dawson that a person does not need to have a staining on his or her arm to have honor.This phrase means so much to the Marine, who was simply following orders in a take mission. Had he not been subjected to the immorality of his commander, he would have been a good soldier. But , he cannot return to his duties and must then show honor in his effortless life, hopefully Kaffee has illustrated this honor and the uselessness of rank, faulty reasoning, and a simple tack on ones arm that does not assume morality.In closing, A Few Good Men in an excellent film to analyse in context of morals and ethical approaches. The two illustrated approaches of virtue and the common good can be seen as a recurring motion throughout 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 part of a court proceeding, it becomes a part of a new honor code for all affected.ReferencesSchickel, Richard. (December 14th, 1992). Close-Order incorrupt Drill. Time. 70.Velasquez, M., Andre, C., Shanks, T, Meyer, S. J. & Meyer M. (W inter, 1996). Thinking Ethically A Framework for honourable Decision Making in Issues in Ethics. 2-5.