Is It Okay To Mislead People For The Greater Good?

934 Words 4 Pages
Every human being, old enough to understand what is right or wrong, have their own sense of morality. In order to keep their morality, there are times where certain things, such as the truth or other people, have to be sacrificed. As a result of those sacrifices, there are times in life where we have to make decisions that make us question our own morality. For example, questions like “is it okay to mislead people for the greater good?” and “is saving five people and killing one better than saving one man and killing five people?” make people question their own sense of morality. In other words, both questions are asking the age old question “do the needs of the many overcome the need of the one?” Due to different people with different opinions, …show more content…
In their “found” documentary, the filmmakers use US government footage to show that the government misled the American public in believing that nuclear warfare is not as bad as it sounds nor seems. Throughout the movie, the director shows what the government that people could defend themselves if they covered themselves with something or if they hid under desks. The government promised that if the public followed what they said than they would not get affected by the radiation. Yet, at the end of the film, the film directors reveal the true effects of an atomic bomb by demonstrating how the bomb completely destroys everything within a certain range. The government hid vital information from the public, believing that the need to protect themselves and lying for the “greater good” was much greater than the need for the American people to know the truth. The misleading is wrong because it hides the truth from most people and it shows the selfish nature of the government. In other words, when one believes that the need of the one overcomes the need of the many, it makes others assume they are selfish or …show more content…
To explain, Steven Pinker from the New York Times goes in depth into the psychology of morality. Pinker states that “moral goodness is what gives each of us the sense that we are worthy human beings,” but in order to make it a burden, it has to be bigger than anybody and outside of anybody. In other words, he can be interpreted in saying that in order to feel truly guilty, the action done or said must be bigger than any of us. The need of the one is not bigger than any of us because it is only for one or a handful of people, rather than the need of the rest because those “needs” are bigger than any single one of us. In addition, Pinker states that philosopher, Joshua Green, suggests that people have evolved to hate manhandling an innocent person; regardless, they would still do it if they were not the ones directly killing the person. To clarify, people naturally hate killing an innocent person (the needs of the one), but they would do it if it benefited the greater amount of people if they did not directly murder them. Once more, it shows that human beings believe that it is better to put the needs of the rest over the needs of the one because it benefits more people than just the

Related Documents