This week in class we discussed the philosophy behind
Immanuel Kant, a philosopher during the Enlightenment period who established
the three types of philosophy. The three types are logic, physics, and ethics
the - latter which we discuss in this class.
The main
topic we discussed in class that I will relate my blog post about is the good
will to duty principle which states normal human conditions manifest itself
acting for the side of duty alone. The two principles of duty are the motive of
duty and the formal principle of duty.
Since we
did not discuss the topic of American Sniper in class this week I would like to
take this time to talk about it in my post. I am currently reading the book American Sniper by Chris Kyle himself
and I am half way done, and I have seen the movie so I feel I know enough about
the topic to have an opinion on whether what he did in his military career was either
morally right or wrong. I am a firm believer that his actions were not morally
wrong. By definition the motive of duty states that a human action is morally
good, not because it’s done from immediate inclinations – nor from
self-interest – BUT because it is done for the sake of duty alone. Chris Kyle
is the most lethal sniper in American military history with over 160 reported
kills during his four tours in Iraq .
Although, he is the most lethal sniper, it was not the number of kills he cared
about; he was more concerned about the lives he couldn’t save. So by going back
to the motive of duty he did not act in a manner that was done from immediate
inclinations nor from self-interest. I find what he did morally good because he
was doing his duty to protect not only his country but family and fellow American
service men and women. The Formal Principle of Duty states in short that an
action done from duty has its moral worth from a formal principle or maxim (a
principle upon which we act). The principle of doing one’s duty whatever it may
be. So by this definition as well Chris Kyle’s actions were of moral worth. He
acted in a sense to protect and serve his nation and to destroy evil in all it’s
forms.
I totally agree with you that Chris Kyle actions were to protect and serve his nation. He was not acting in his own self interest. He did not care about the label he received for what he did, which is, American Hero, he only cared about protecting his men and protecting his nation. He went back for four tours to serve his country, not to serve himself. His duty was to protect and serve and thats exactly what he did. His motive was for the sake of his country and protecting its men and women.
ReplyDeleteI think that the duty that Chris Kyle had to do for his country made what he did right by the rules and laws of the world. This is a hard topic to talk about because the taking of a human life is not easily measured by how morally correct it is. According to the Bible and Ten Commandments "Thou shall not kill". This can be hard to follow sometimes. What if you are fighting for your life so that the other person does not kill you or even so he wont kill others. I think what Chris Kyle did was prevent killing of others and this is what made his actions moral. It is in the same instance as Hitler. We kill one man to save millions. It also relates to the Trolly problem that we talked about in class where you have to make decisions sometimes based off of the outcome not the number.
ReplyDelete