An
ethical dilemma I’ve been pondering recently is from the movie Lawrence of Arabia. The movie is based on the life of British Colonel
T.E. Lawrence after he was placed in charge of coordinating the Arab tribal
armies against the Turkish army in World War I.
As a disclaimer, I am unsure how historically accurate the movie details
are, but the general timeline of events is correct. In any case, some background on the scene
before you watch it. This scene takes
place while Lawrence is trying to lead the Arab tribes quickly towards Damascus
for a battle. Along the way they catch
up with a Turkish army unit that has been pillaging and killing all the
inhabitances of the villages they encounter.
Lawrence does not have the time or means to take prisoner those who will
inevitably surrender but if he goes around the unit they will continue raiding innocent
villages. Some of those fighting with
him are from the sacked villages.
This is where the scene picks up; Lawrence decides
to go around and help those in Damascus or kill without mercy to save more
villages.
Unfortunately
this scene was the only clip I could find and it has been edited down from the
original. The original had some discussion of the two options. It still shows the decision between shedding blood
to save others or allowing innocent people to die. I think it demonstrates a curious aspect to
ethical decision making. Those with
families in the local villages wanted to take the ethically gray road because
they had a personal interest in it (one even charged without orders). Once Lawrence’s friend charged ahead and was
killed it gave Lawrence a personal interest.
This made Lawrence more willing to wade into the ethically gray area.
I
feel that often time we do the same in our lives. When a situation has no personal meaning to
us it is easy to take the ethical high ground.
Yet when there is a personal connection, we are more willing to let a
little gray into our lives. The question
I feel we must answer for ourselves is should we compromise ethics, even a
little, when something gets personal?
This is a good examples of the complexities of ethics, and I agree with Ryan's statement about personal involvement vs abstract philosophical positions. Kant wanted to create a system that would work through pure reason. He acknowledges how our will and desires interfere with the categorical imperative of duty and honor and taking the moral high road. Great i theory, but very difficult in real life decisions.
ReplyDelete