We discussed in class the Trolley problem, where if we could save the lives of many by sacrificing the lives of one or few, would we? In the same experiment, we replaced the life of the single stranger for the life of a loved one. We found that many people in class, whom first choose to save many lives, changed their answer to save the life of their loved one. We do this because now the outcome directly affects us.
While all this is purely hypothetical, it is not far from the truth of what the U.S. President does during a time of war. In order to save the many lives of the American public, the President dispatches relatively few American soldiers overseas to fight an enemy. Many of these soldiers will not return home, and are therefor sacrificing their lives in order to save the lives of the American public.
In both instances we are still choosing between saving the lives of a larger group, or saving the lives of a smaller group. Also, in both instances of the experiment, and war, we see an idea of saving "the greater good," and putting just reasoning behind the desions that have been made. In the words of Polemarchus, "Justice is doing good to one's friends, and harm to one's enemies." The problem with this definition of justice is that sometimes it is hard to differentiate one's friends from one's enemies, but for arguments sake, the American public are our friend. Nevertheless, with this idea of justice, the U.S. President is just to send American soldiers, American lives, overseas to harm the people, the lives, of our enemy.
However, the U.S. President is also just in Thrasymachus' idea of justice being, "... the advantage of the strongest," whereas the President has the power to, if necessary like in the Vietnam war, call a draft in order to sustain a fight in a war where quantity of soldiers are lacking. Yet, if the word justice has no true definition set in stone, then how can one's actions ever truly be just? And if so, then by saving the lives of one or many for the lives of others be just?
Im not really sure about the true definition of justice but I do know that there is a definition for a just law. In Letter from Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King Jr. defines a just and an unjust law. "A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law." So I guess what I'm trying to say is that justice is based on morality. St. Thomas Aquinas says that "Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust." So continuing on your question, yes I believe that saving the lives of one or many for the lives of others is just because these soldiers know what they signed up for and they are proud to serve their country so that we can live the lives that we do safe from all harm.
ReplyDeleteThe trolley problem discussion reminded me of a film that I watched in church. It was about a father and his son, that age around five or eight, and that the father told his son to work with him, he was operating a bridge that opened up for boat to pass by. His son played around and fall in the bridge's moving compartment and a boat was going to pass by. He knew that his son was there and that the boat was going to pass be so he could only save son or the people on the boat. At the end opened the bridge for the boat which killed his son. He looked down on the boat and saw alcoholics, sexual abuse, gamblers, and horrible people. On the floor crying for the son the son that he kill for the people on the boat. Once the boat stopped all of the passengers got out and walked away not knowing what happened. The man gets up still upset of the die of his child, then he noticed and woman with a young baby that came out of the boat. He then was relieved of his decision.
ReplyDelete