Part A
Definition of Special Obligations and Role Morality
Special Obligations refer to the ethical responsibilities that arise from particular roles or relationships. These obligations are not universally applicable but are specific to the context of one’s position, such as being a parent, teacher, or military service member. They highlight the idea that individuals have certain duties towards specific people or groups based on their roles.
Role Morality is a concept that relates to the ethical framework governing a person’s actions based on their professional or social role. It suggests that individuals may have moral duties that are distinct from general ethical principles due to their specific positions. For instance, a doctor has a moral obligation to prioritize patient care, which may sometimes conflict with broader ethical considerations.
Special Moral Obligations in Military Service
Entering military service entails taking on several special moral obligations, including:
1. Loyalty to Country: Service members have a duty to defend their nation and its interests, which can sometimes require placing national interest above personal safety.
2. Commitment to Fellow Soldiers: There is a strong ethical obligation to protect and support comrades in arms, fostering camaraderie and trust within the unit.
3. Adherence to Orders: Soldiers are expected to follow lawful orders from superiors, which may involve difficult moral decisions in challenging situations.
4. Upholding Humanitarian Standards: Military personnel have an obligation to adhere to international laws and protocols regarding the treatment of enemy combatants and civilians, emphasizing respect for human rights.
Rules for Enemy Service Personnel and Foreign Civilians
The rules applying to enemy service personnel are primarily governed by the Geneva Conventions, which set forth standards for humane treatment in armed conflict. These rules dictate that captured enemy combatants should be treated humanely, afforded due process, and protected from torture or degrading treatment.
For foreign civilians, the rules are outlined in international humanitarian law, which protects non-combatants during conflicts. Civilians must not be targeted, and parties to a conflict must take precautions to avoid harm to civilian lives and property. They should also receive protection and assistance if they are affected by hostilities.
Evaluation of the Captain’s Decision
In evaluating whether the captain of the H.M.S. Alacrity did the right thing by accepting an order that risked his life and the lives of his crew, it is essential to consider the context of military service and duty. The captain’s acceptance of the order reflects adherence to role morality, demonstrating loyalty to command and commitment to mission objectives.
However, this decision also raises moral questions regarding the value of individual lives versus duty. If the order was deemed unnecessary or reckless, it could be argued that the captain should have questioned it. Ultimately, while the captain’s actions align with military obligations and role morality, they must also weigh the ethical implications of sacrificing lives for orders that may not align with a just cause.
Part B
Special Obligations to Grace
Considering my relationship with Grace, I have several special obligations toward her as a friend. These include:
1. Support: I have an ethical duty to assist her during challenging times.
2. Honesty: Maintaining trust through truthful interactions is crucial.
3. Advocacy: I should advocate for her well-being and interests when she is unable to do so herself.
Should I Falsify My Expense Report?
While I feel a strong obligation to help Grace, particularly if she is in a difficult financial situation, falsifying my expense report would violate ethical norms and potentially lead to significant consequences for both of us. Therefore, my special obligations do not justify unethical actions such as falsifying documents.
Tension Between Special Obligations and Constraints/Consequences
My special obligations to Grace create tension with considerations of constraints and consequences because:
– Ethical Constraints: While I want to support Grace, doing so through dishonest means contradicts my commitment to integrity and honesty.
– Consequences: Falsifying my expense report could lead to disciplinary action against me and damage my reputation, ultimately harming both my relationship with Grace and my professional standing.
Thus, while my special obligations urge me to assist Grace directly, they conflict with the broader ethical considerations of honesty and accountability. This highlights the complexity of moral decision-making, where personal loyalties may clash with professional ethics and legal responsibilities. Ultimately, finding a solution that supports Grace without compromising ethical standards would be ideal. For example, I could offer her emotional support or help her explore legitimate options for financial assistance instead.
Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay 
