Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Ethics of emergencies

Rate this topic


tommyedison
 Share

Recommended Posts

I just saw one of the worst films of Hollywood "John Q".

It is about a man whose son needs a heart transplant or he will die. The man does not have enough money so he takes the entire emergency crew of the hospital as hostage to force them to perform a heart transplant surgery on his son.

Now this is an exceptional situation, but did the man do the right thing or the wrong thing? Wasn't he acting in his self-interest, trying to save the life of his son? Or does morality does not apply to this situation and there is no right or wrong in this scenario?

I know I am going wrong somewhere here in my reasoning. Please help me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just saw one of the worst films  of Hollywood "John Q".

It is about a man whose son needs a heart transplant or he will die. The man does not have enough money so he takes the entire emergency crew of the hospital as hostage to force them to perform a heart transplant surgery on his son.

Now this is an exceptional situation, but did the man do the right thing or the wrong thing? Wasn't he acting in his self-interest, trying to save the life of his son? Or does morality does not apply to this situation and there is no right or wrong in this scenario?

I know I am going wrong somewhere here in my reasoning. Please help me.

This is an example of one man initiating force against others, and this practice is always wrong...probably one of the major "sins" according to the Objectivist Ethics. His need to save his son is certainly not a rightfull claim to the services of the doctors. He[the father] is violating the doctor's right to the use of their mind, and the right to a payment for their services.....well, he's really violating every fundamental right here. He could've found other ways to save his son [such as making sure that you can support your children BEFORE you have them], and even if he couldn't find any help, his actions are still wrong.

And I also think it's a mistake to suppose that he can only find his "self-interest" in violating the rights of others. He may get away with it for a while, but certainly not in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious now, because I've not seen the film: how accurate is that "review"?  It is titled an "unseen movie review".  Did it end the way he predicted it would?  I'd be willing to bet it did.

Although I don't remember exactly, I think the guy was captured but acquitted. His son got a heart from some woman so the movie did not end the way it was predicted by the review.

It was much worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...