The main goal of this paper is to show how the film "Man of Steel" and the utilitarianism are deeply interconnected and how ethical dilemmas are taken up.
The goal of utilitarianism is to weigh the consequences of each committed act precisely and to select the course of action that leads to the greater amount of happiness and satisfaction for the greater number of people. However, this often ends in moral dilemmas, such as in Man of Steel. The question of the righteousness of the characters' actions in this film keeps cropping up and makes the viewer reflect on whether Superman's actions are morally justified.
With this in mind, I presume that the principle of utilitarianism runs like a golden thread through the entire film, and that almost all characters in Man of Steel embody an attitude to utilitarianism, be it the protagonist Clark Kent himself, his stepfather Jonathan Kent, or the antagonist General Zod. I want to argue that the question of whether Superman should reveal himself to society and how to weigh the pros and cons of this issue plays a very important role in the film and represents the morality of each character.
I will analyze the movie in this regard in this paper, proving how Man of Steel deals with these issues and shows that the message is not the demonstration of pure action, but the study of the morality of the characters, the possession of superpowers and the question of when they are to be used.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The principle of utilitarianism in Man of Steel
2.1. Man of Steel and the trolley problem
2.2. Other examples of utilitarianism in Man of Steel
2.3. Rule- and act- utilitarianism
3. Conclusion
4. Works Cited List
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines the 2013 film "Man of Steel" through the lens of utilitarian ethics, exploring how the protagonist and other characters navigate complex moral dilemmas. The study aims to demonstrate that the film serves as a platform for analyzing the morality of its characters rather than merely showcasing superhero action, ultimately questioning whether Superman's actions—and those of his counterparts—are ethically justified according to utilitarian principles.
- The application of utilitarian theory to the character development of Clark Kent.
- The moral justification behind the actions of characters like Jonathan Kent and General Zod.
- An analysis of specific scenes involving ethical dilemmas, such as the "trolley problem" in the context of the film.
- The distinction between act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism in the behavior of figures like Perry White and the U.S. government.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1. Man of Steel and the trolley problem
This situation is similar to a well-known thought experiment of an ethical dilemma called the trolley problem, first explained by Phillippa Foot (White 63). The situation is explained as follows: A trolley car is rolling down a railway track and on the track, there are five people who cannot move and cannot avoid the trolley, which if not somehow intervened will inevitably kill the people. Furthermore, with a switch it is possible to change the trolleys direction to another track, to which another person, also will be killed (White 64). The question now is if, one should stand idly by or change the direction of the trolley, and to sacrifice one person's life for those of five (White 64). A utilitarian would change the direction of the trolley, as there would be a greater degree of happiness and well-being for a larger number of people; the five lives outweigh only one life. In another known thought experiment, a surgeon has five patients, all of whom lack a vital organ and can be rescued by a transplant. In a legal way, though, one cannot obtain any of the missing organs, so the surgeon considers to remove an organ from one of his colleagues and transplant it; his colleague would die but five people would be saved (White 64-65). The difference between these two experiments is that ”most people will agree that throwing the trolley switch is justified, and also that the surgeon’s actions are not, but we have a very difficult time saying precisely why we feel that way—and that includes philosophers!”14
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter outlines the controversial portrayal of Superman in "Man of Steel" and introduces the core ethical framework of utilitarianism as the analytical lens for the paper.
2. The principle of utilitarianism in Man of Steel: This section explores how various characters, including General Zod, Jor-El, and Jonathan Kent, internalize and act upon utilitarian motives throughout the narrative.
2.1. Man of Steel and the trolley problem: This chapter compares Superman's moral dilemmas to classical ethical thought experiments to determine if his destructive actions can be justified.
2.2. Other examples of utilitarianism in Man of Steel: This section analyzes secondary characters and specific plot points, such as Colonel Hardy's sacrifice and Perry White's handling of information, to highlight contrasting moral stances.
2.3. Rule- and act- utilitarianism: This chapter categorizes the actions of different characters based on the distinction between rule-utilitarianism and act-utilitarianism.
3. Conclusion: The concluding chapter summarizes the study's findings, emphasizing that the film portrays an evolving, fallible Superman and uses utilitarianism to navigate significant ethical challenges.
4. Works Cited List: This section provides a comprehensive bibliography of the philosophical and critical sources used to support the paper's arguments.
Keywords
Man of Steel, Utilitarianism, Superman, Ethics, General Zod, Trolley Problem, Moral Dilemma, John Stuart Mill, Greater Good, Sacrifice, Philosophy, Heroism, Rule-utilitarianism, Act-utilitarianism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper focuses on analyzing the 2013 movie "Man of Steel" through the philosophical framework of utilitarianism to evaluate the moral legitimacy of the characters' actions.
What are the central themes discussed?
The central themes include the morality of superpowers, the weight of the "greater good," the ethics of self-sacrifice, and the tension between individual morality and societal safety.
What is the main research goal?
The goal is to prove that "Man of Steel" is not just an action film, but a study of character morality and the complex application of utilitarian ethical dilemmas.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The author uses a qualitative film analysis combined with an application of classical utilitarian theory, specifically referencing the works of John Stuart Mill and other philosophical commentators.
What does the main body of the text cover?
The main body examines specific scenes—such as the trolley problem scenario, the sacrifice of Jonathan Kent, and the actions of General Zod—to show how utilitarianism is applied in the film.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include Utilitarianism, Man of Steel, Moral Dilemma, Greater Good, and Ethical Framework.
How does the film's portrayal of Superman differ from previous versions?
The film portrays a younger, less experienced, and more emotionally unstable Superman who is forced to make difficult, sometimes destructive, moral choices that challenge his traditional "no-kill" rule.
Why is Jonathan Kent's philosophy described as utilitarian?
Jonathan Kent is willing to sacrifice both his own life and potentially the lives of others to keep Clark's identity a secret, believing that the long-term benefit for the "greater good" justifies these immediate, harsh decisions.
Does General Zod embody utilitarian principles?
Yes, Zod is presented as an extreme utilitarian who justifies the destruction of humanity and the sacrifice of individuals as a necessary means to achieve the survival and resurrection of his own race.
- Quote paper
- Anonym (Author), 2018, "Man of Steel" and Utilitarianism. A Philosophical Perspective, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1025683
