Bungee Jumping Off The Moral High-Field Analysis
Bungee Jumping off the Moral High-ground: The Ethics of Espionage in the Modern Age is written by Tony Pfaff. In this chapter, Tony Pfaff discusses the ethical standings in the intelligence professions. The main fundamental belief in both the intelligence and military fields is: no lying, cheating, stealing, or tolerating those who do. After the terrorist attack in September 11, the effectiveness and the ethics of the intelligence profession were questioned and reassessed. It all comes down to the point of the intelligence professions doing things unethical to accomplish their obligation of serving their country. In which results, to sometimes taking human life or harming others. After the Cold War, the intelligence community were reassessed
…show more content…
An intelligence professional does an unethical act to a human, in order to uphold their ethical obligation of serving their country, and protecting their citizens and welfare. Hence, to do that, he or she must deceive, kill, steal from, or caused to be kill to save millions of people. This is one of the principles of deontology, along with the philosophy of utilitarianism. In deontology, I have learned that humans do their duties (no lying, cheating, killing, etc) because it is right. Basically, humans must follow what is right, because it is the right thing to do. Some would agree to the actions that the intelligence agency took were wrong, and some would think that it right. Everyone has their own ethical and moral perspectives in the intelligence organizations doing. In my perspective, the intelligence professional is a mix of deontology and utilitarianism. I think that the intelligence professionals believe the right thing to do is to protect and serve their country. By doing so, it would require harming others and/or doing the wrong actions. Many people would see it as unethical because they are killing, deceiving, lying, cheating on, or harming people yet they are doing this with a good intention of saving million of lives. I agree that harming or putting people in harm is a bad idea and action to take, but what if you were in a position of doing harm to one person to protect one hundred people? I think harming that one person would be a better choice because you will be able to save one hundred other
An intelligence professional does an unethical act to a human, in order to uphold their ethical obligation of serving their country, and protecting their citizens and welfare. Hence, to do that, he or she must deceive, kill, steal from, or caused to be kill to save millions of people. This is one of the principles of deontology, along with the philosophy of utilitarianism. In deontology, I have learned that humans do their duties (no lying, cheating, killing, etc) because it is right. Basically, humans must follow what is right, because it is the right thing to do. Some would agree to the actions that the intelligence agency took were wrong, and some would think that it right. Everyone has their own ethical and moral perspectives in the intelligence organizations doing. In my perspective, the intelligence professional is a mix of deontology and utilitarianism. I think that the intelligence professionals believe the right thing to do is to protect and serve their country. By doing so, it would require harming others and/or doing the wrong actions. Many people would see it as unethical because they are killing, deceiving, lying, cheating on, or harming people yet they are doing this with a good intention of saving million of lives. I agree that harming or putting people in harm is a bad idea and action to take, but what if you were in a position of doing harm to one person to protect one hundred people? I think harming that one person would be a better choice because you will be able to save one hundred other