Gallipoli the Ethics of Gallipoli Essay

Total Length: 564 words ( 2 double-spaced pages)

Total Sources: 3

Page 1 of 2



Immanuel Kant uses a far more complex argument in defining and defending his ethical framework in "Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals," but its application to this scenario is actually remarkably simple. Kant basically asserts that all acts are either ethically good or bad, and that this judgment does not depend upon the scenario in which the action is taking place or the ultimate effects of the action. Killing someone, for example, must be considered morally wrong, otherwise killing would always be right and we would all be dead very quickly. The campaign in Gallipoli, then, and indeed all warfare and any other situation wherein one man kills another, whether in a state-sponsored and approved manner or not, is inherently wrong and ethically unacceptable. This moral absolutism runs into problems when others aspects of the situation come into consideration -- it is wrong to disobey orders, for instance, and the fact that those orders command something that is ethically wrong doesn't influence the ethical violation of disobedience; it is also wrong not to prevent death, and this is supposedly what these soldiers are doing for others -- whether or not they succeed has nothing to do with the ethicality of their actions, according to Kant. This is one of the reasons that such absolute ethical theories are not often employed.
From either perspective, however, it can clearly be seen that the events at Gallipoli -- especially as they are represented in Peter Weir's film of the same name -- were in violation of basic human ethics and responsibilities. It is likely that most campaigns would be seen in the same light......

Need Help Writing Your Essay?