Last month, we examined the first part of a course in ethics for warrant officers in Basic School. The course begins, properly, by defining key terms like “ethics” and “morality” and recognizes, though not explicitly, that ethics is the study of morality that seeks broadly to understand the essences of right and wrong, good and evil, in both personal and social conduct. Importantly, the course advocates a virtue ethics approach to ethics that “focuses on the character of the person as opposed to specific moral rules or moral actions.” This makes sense because the core values of the Marines, honor, courage, and commitment, are virtues. In the tradition of virtue ethics there are numerous definitions of virtue that have the effect of examining this important concept from a variety of perspectives. In the 20^th century, a German philosopher named Josef Pieper sought to get to the essence of virtue and came to the definition that virtues are “perfected abilities.” Thus the important virtue of prudence is the perfected ability to take right decisions.[i] It is significant for Pieper that when one accepts this definition of prudence, it becomes clear that “All virtue is necessarily prudent.” So the virtues of honor, courage, and commitment are expressed in consistently taking right decisions in situations which call these virtues into action.

This month, we will look deeper into the course to see how the Marine Corps explains the working out of virtue ethics in the conduct and practices of Marines. Having discussed ethics, morality, and virtue ethics, the course proceeds to consider military ethics where we read in part: “Our obligation as Marines serving ‘Corps and Country’ is more than simply obeying orders. It requires a sense of commitment to both the mission and roles we serve in as Marines. Mere awareness of the responsibility involved is not enough. There must exist a tenacious sense of obligation, and a strong sense of duty and honor in all that we accomplish. At this level of commitment, we are dealing with ethics.” One may reasonably ask how it is determined that at this level of commitment “we are dealing with ethics.” The answer might be found in the use of the words “tenacious” and “strong” to describe a Marine’s senses of obligation, duty, and honor. It is one thing to understand the responsibilities of one’s role in any organization, it is something else for the qualities needed to accomplish one’s function to be deeply inculcated in one’s character as perfected abilities, or virtues.

The tenacious sense of obligation and the strong sense of duty and honor are next put to the test in the form of a thought experiment in which someone catches a close friend cheating on an exam. He is obliged to report the infraction to the test moderator, but he feels at the same time a sense of loyalty to the friend. This situation is called a “moral dilemma” and is defined in the course as “a situation that requires a choice between equally undesirable alternatives.” This definition may be sharpened by saying that a moral dilemma is a situation in which it appears that whichever course of action one chooses among the available options, he will violate a moral obligation. We can readily see the duty to report to proper authority an act of willful wrongdoing one has witnessed, but does the loyalty one owes to a friend constitute a conflicting duty to say nothing about the wrongful act? 

READ MORE

iStock: mohd izzuan