The Waking Dead Analysis

The Waking Dead is a television series show based on a post zombie apocalypse scenario. The main character Rick throughout the series is looked at as the leader by his ever changing group of survivors. This group which includes his son and daughter are trying to survive in the zombie apocalypse. They are constantly dealing with trying to protect one another from the zombies and gaining basic necessitates. The group begins to find that true malevolence is with in people and not the walking dead. With no laws or regulations people turn to do whatever is best for themselves and their groups. This causes mass killings of humans for food, water, weapons and safety. The core of the show is the survivor’s dilemmas as they struggle to keep their sanity …show more content…
This would mean that being happy is everyone’s ultimate goal. Not only is this the objective, but all actions that are put forth will be for that single goal. Mills explains that happiness should be prompted for the greater good because it is our ultimate end (115). This stresses that the greater good is for the greatest number of people it suffices because when living in any type of society you must consider everyone’s happiness. From this point of view, all actions that are completed utterly depend on the outcome of the situation. A utilitarian would say to be morally good you must always have a good consequence for the greatest number of people. In Rick’s situation he would have been looked at as morally bad for trying to negotiate and putting everyone at risk. To be morally good as utilitarian he would have had to kill the governor. Killing that one corrupt person would of saved the lives of many in of the survivors from each group. Even though Rick is a pleasant guy and wants to find a median, the number of people he is putting at risk is not the greatest good for the greatest number. Knowing how cruel the governor was he had every right to kill him for the best consequences. This would have spared the lives of many in both groups and stopped the …show more content…
Not only are things aimed to do the function, but to ensure that it is done as well as possible. If you are able to do the function well then you are completely fulfilling it. Aristotle describes how eudemonia is the key way to live in order to have good for all humans this does not mean just to flourish, but to pay attention to the accordance of virtue (81). This ethic promotes that morality is based solely on a person’s character. A human’s function for good is to have “the activity of the soul in accordance with virtue” (Aristotle 84). Since only humans can truly reason, this is how they control their emotions and needs. Virtues are something humans are not born worth, but are choices that can become stronger with habit. Aristotle knows that being a good person is not easy and understands that human emotions should be accounted for. To be morally good is to have a good state of character based on your rational median. Humans need to find a good median between not too little or not too much. As a virtue ethicist Rick’s decision to negotiate was morally good. Since morality is based on the person trying to find a median, we see Rick trying to suffice both the governor and his needs. His thoughts are put into consideration with his reason to be able to meet his needs of shelter and his group at the same time. He was also finding the rational means