Naval Leadership and Ethics NS402 (Daniel Lee 2E1)

8/11/2019 Naval Leadership and Ethics NS402 (Daniel Lee 2E1)

1/7

Daniel Lee

Ethics

Williams

09/07/13

Naval Leadership and Ethics NS402MidtermExam

Answer the questions below as completely and accurately as you can. You may use your

textbook, lecture notes and anything posted on Blackboard. I expect well-reasoned, well-

written answers with specific references to the readings if necessary to support your answer.

If I cant seeyour thinking your grade will suffer. All answers must be in your own words

and any quotations must be clearly marked. When referencing the textbooks, Ethics in the

Military Profession, use (EMP, pg# ) or Case Studies in Ethics, (CSE, pg#) to cite thesource. This midterm is an indiv idu al assignm ent. The write-up you will be submitting

needs to be strictly the result of personal and independent effort no collaboration!

I pledge that this exam represents all my own work in accordance with

regulations.

Signed:


2/7

Foundations of Moral Leadership

1. (9 points) Why do we need to study ethics? Give at least 3 reasons.

There are many reasons why ethics should be studied. One primary reason is that, as human

beings, we all make decisions that influence our daily lives. It is essential that we make

decisions to reach a certain goal within our own lives. These goals can include what kind of

person one would like to become or how one would like to live ones life.

Another reasons is that ethics provides a certain standard for what is good and bad.

Usually, ethics provide a set of guideline that human beings sorely need to follow. It can be

considered as a guide to life as it throws in what one should do and not do. However, the

problem with this is that there is always a standard. This standard can be different for many

people as we do not know each and every persons definition of right and wrong.

This brings us to our third reason for us to study ethics. The need to differentiate what

is good and wrong is paramount for the education of leaders of not just within the maritime

society but the whole world. It is also necessary to be able to justify the decisions made.

With this, ethics should not necessarily be studied by a society, but an individual.


3/7

Moral Relativism

2. (15 points) Define, in your own words, moral relativism. Contrast it with moral

absolutism or objectivism and moral pluralism. Provide arguments for and against

each.

Moral relativism is ethics that is based on the cultures and traditions of a particular society.

For example, In South Korea, eating dogs is acceptable as they are seen as livestock.

However, in the United States, people generally view dogs as friends and pets. Therefore,

the ethics of every country is different.

Moral absolutism is the theory that there is an absolute right and wrong in life. This is

connected to religion in the fact that some may believe that God is the ultimate source of

morality.

Finally, there is moral pluralism which is the notion that internationally, there are many

theories about what is right and wrong. As such, when one is put into another society with

different ethical norms, it is paramount to make decisions based on that norm if it is in

contrast with your own.

Different cultures should be respected according to their own norm as it their way of life.

However, I do not believe that one should adapt to their culture if visiting a foreign culture

which is stated by moral pluralism. For example, in the Middle East, woman are required to

wear shawls to cover their faces. This is due to moral absolutism from the religion of Islam.

Thus, moral absolutism is wrong. I believe that all woman from the USA are granted a right

to be free and equal.


4/7

Constitutional Ethics

3. (12 points) State and explain the constitutional constraints on the military.

The Constitutional Paradigm exists to serve as a reference point to those in the military whoare facing ethical dilemmas. There are four principles and they are followed in the order listed.

The First Principle states that there is a hierarchy priorities that must be followed.

1. Constitution

2. Mission3. Service4. Ship or Command5. Shipmate6. Self

Any other external obligations such as religion and family must not intervene with thehierarchy.

The Second Principle states that when there is a conflict of loyalties, they must be resolved.One could have a religious conflict with the hierarchy listed above. However, it is importantthat the conflict be resolved in some way or fashion. Being idle and taking no action is

disastrous.

The Third Principle states that any individual who fails to follow the above two principle shouldfind another line of work in which the conflicts do not apply. If one cannot follow theconstitutional paradigm, then one has made the oath under false pretenses.

The Fourth Principle states that there may be cases where one encounters an ethicaldilemma that is incredible offensive to ones own beliefs. In this case, one should just resignaccording the third principle. However, it may be that his moral beliefs tell him to confront thesituation rather than just resign.

To apply the fourth, there must be a number of prerequisites in order. To begin with, the

dilemma must be a fundamental violation of justice. Petty matters do not apply. Secondly,there should be an attempt to change the law. Thirdly, the action must be in public withnothing to hide. Finally, the person committing it must be ready for the full consequence of hisor her actions.


5/7

4. (20 points) The Constitutional Paradigm describes one approach if your personal morals

are in conflict with your mission (official obligation). Explain the principles with an example,

either of your own or one of the cases from class.

During the Korean War, in 1952, a Lieutenant Roh who was in the ROKA (The

Republic of Korea Army), was tasked with blowing up a bridge to stop the Chinese soldiers

who were advancing down into Korean territory. However, naturally, there were also refugees

try to go across the bridge. The commanding officer ordered him to blow up the bridge before

the Chinese got there in approximately two hours.

Roh was faced with an ethical dilemma. The soldiers mission was to blow up the

bridge which was a direct order from his commanding officer. However, his moral belief told

him killing innocents were wrong. This is a conflict of the second principle.

Roh decided to resign and told his officer he wouldnt do it violating the second

principle. In the end, He fulfilled the third principle by resigning from his position.

(The example used in this question comes from the Korean War film, Welcome to Dokmagol)


6/7

Kantian Ethics

5. (9 points) Consider the Aviano case study.

a. How does this case illustrate the "categorical" nature of our duties?

Destroying the tape was a violation of Kants categorical imperative theory. There was no excusefor destroying the tape as it provided information that could have been useful to the trial. Destroying thetape might as well be a confession.

b. Is "duty always over self-interest" an unreasonable expectation?

It is not an unreasonable expectation. Those who work under the United States Constitution areleaders and as such, should always follow their duty even if it is in the way of their self-interests.

c. What does the Constitutional Paradigm say about their moral decision to cover upevidence?

They violated the first principle by prioritizing self which comes in dead last.


7/7

Moral Reasoning

6. (35 points) Read the case study Terror and RetaliationWho Is Right?(CSE p 57)

a. Analyze both cases using each of the four ethical frameworks: Utilitarian, Kantian,Natural Law, and Divine Law. For each case and framework, would the action be consideredmoral and why?

Utilitarian would state that the end result was accomplished. The goal was toretaliate against the terrorists and kill the bomb maker.

A Kantian would ask if the action is necessary. For instance, is it necessary to

retaliate against the Palestenians for killing the men, women, and children? Theconsequence does not matter as long as the action was (in their view) morally right.

One following the natural law would say that killing in retaliation is not right.

Divine Law would say that it is acceptable because it is holy war. In the bible,there were many wars. Also, many religious wars such as the crusades were influencedby the Bible.

b. In your opinion, were the actions moral? Why?

The actions were moral because the detonation of the bomb is a declaration of war. By

killing the terrorist, the Israeli government believed that less causalities would occur. They alsodid not know about the civilians behind the building.

Documents

Naval Leadership and Ethics NS402 (Daniel Lee 2E1)