Villanueva, Elaine Veda A.

4-Sociology

Crimson Tide, a movie that is all about making moral and ethical decisions and doing responsibly the call of duties and law in the world of nuclear warfare. In this regard, the two commanding officers have differences in terms of philosophies that brought them in conflict. It can be seen that the two possesses Ignorance. The XO possessed vincible ignorance in the scenario that a fire breaks out in the galley and he looked after it first. The voluntariness of his act is not destroyed but it is lessened. Thus, he also did his responsibility to their men. The voluntariness is lessened due to his concurrence on the call of the CO for a drill in the middle of the fire even if he does not want to. He also possessed vincible ignorance due to the fact that he was aware that a nuclear holocaust could happen if they pushed through the firing of the missiles; and although he was in his full responsibility for the mutiny, his actions lessened his culpability because the good was achieved in the end. Also, in the conversation they had, when the XO told that the true enemy is war itself. He had vincible ignorance on this matter because the voluntariness to serve the war is lessened but the responsibility he has for his country and men is not destroyed. Moreover, XO had a shift to invincible ignorance. It was when the XO insisted to wait for the completion of the EAM because he stood in his claim not to fire the missiles even if he had uncertainties in the

situation. He might be wrong or right about his standpoint not to launch the missiles. Given that he also knows the rules of the book, but he really had the desire to prevent the war. On the other hand, the CO possessed invincible ignorance. It was because of his firm disposition that they were on a mission and that nothing was more important than the orders and war itself. He called a drill even if he knows that the fire could possibly flared back. And because of this thinking that he should follow orders alone made him invincibly ignorant on the other matters of the ship. In the course of their conflict, the CO forgot that it was important to have a radio transmitter and wait for the message to be completed. But then, the CO cannot be solely blamed because in fact, the fate of their country depends on him and all he got to do was to carry out the mission that was put on his full responsibility. However, the CO had a shift to vincible ignorance wherein he allowed time for the radio to be fixed to know the full message which he knew that it was the right thing to do to solve the uncertainties they both have. It was by due diligence and his reasonable efforts to confirm first the message before doing an act of firing. Furthermore, this movie depicted the principles followed by the two, ethical and legal principles. XO followed the ethical principle of utilitarianism and double-effect. In the conditions of double-effect, there must be sufficient reason grave enough calling for the act to be done

(Ethics Class Lecture) that supports the principle When in doubt, do not act. XO followed this by not acting until the completion of the message from the commanding post is sent. Because of his doubts, he chose to stay firm with his beliefs and desire to save more lives that is bound for greater good. Moreover, stated in the principle of double- effect that, a good effect should precede an evil effect and the intention should be honest (Ethics Class Lecture). Even though he took over the mutiny and control of the submarine, his intention was honest. He did not want to create a nuclear war or worse a nuclear holocaust; and in the end, good was achieved. He also followed utilitarianism because he would not want to sacrifice his countrys sake for any mistake they would commit if they would launch the missiles and this was more manifested in the decision he made in the closing of a hatch to save the rest of the crew. On the contrary, legal principles were followed by the CO. The actions by the CO were justified by the US Navy Regulations/ Procedures. In this regard, even if the CO committed some unethical decisions, but due to his obedience to the law, his acts were justified. All he knew was to accomplish the mission tasked to him and from these regulations, he had a strong disposition that he was the only one who could command the crew of what should and should not be done. Still, there were two important ethical decisions made in the movie. First, the closing of a hatch in which XO orders to close it to save the submarine

and the rest of the crew. If it was not sealed, the crew could have died. This ethical decision is supported by the ethical principle of utilitarianism. XO made a utilitarian calculation when he thought of the interests of the several members rather than the few. Thus, he sacrificed the three men to save the lives of the many. Second, on the pointing of the gun; Weps first acted on agreeing to set the missiles for launch. He became fearful on the thought and cost it might bring to his family if he would not follow the COs orders. Thus, this was an act done from fear. There was a compelling force that pushed him to open the safe. If it were not for the presence of COs pointing of gun to Hilaire, Weps would not unlock it. Moreover, COs pointing of gun is a human act because the CO had the full knowledge of the situation wherein they needed to fire already and he exercised his freedom from the standpoint that he was right and this act was not against his will because he was just performing his duties as the commander. Overall, the differences between the two illustrated how to act and decide in both legal and ethical ways.

Work Cited

Montaa, R. "Ethics Class Lecture." November 2011.