Last Updated 16 Apr 2020

Philo Paper on Morality

Category Essay Examples
Essay type Research
Words 1188 (4 pages)
Views 396

Life is Beautiful, a film by Roberto Benign', is a two-part film, the first part was purely comedy, the other brought smiles through tears (Bert 1998). It is about a guy named Guide Orifice, a Jew, who lived in Italy with his uncle during the time of the Nazis. He fell in love with a girl named Dora, a Gentile, to whom he had his only son. He was a free-spirited man who always has his way out of misery. He can always shed light to a very miserable experience.

This was specifically illustrated in the second part of the elm wherein all the Jews, including Guide, his uncle, and their five-year-old child Joshua, were taken by the Fascist and Nazis and were brought in a concentration camp. So was Dora, who pleaded the officers to let her go with his family so she also went aboard the train. There, Guide was still able to make up a story in order for his son not to be terrified. He told his son that they were Just in a big competition and they must gain a thousand points in order to win the first prize.

He even went to the extremes by lingering as a translator of the Germans, Just for his child to believe that what he was saying was true, because all he said was about the competition since he really did not speak German. He also went through a lot of sacrifices Just to protect his family who was also there. He even became a waiter for the Nazi and used the intercom to tell his wife at the other end of the camp that he loves him so much.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on

Philo Paper on Morality

just from $13,9 / page

get custom paper

He risked his life because his wife's and child's life are more precious to him than his So the main issue here that must be dealt with in relation to morality and peace is he very act of Guide lying to his child Just to protect his life and his innocence from the terror that the concentration camps bring so that he will never lose hope that some day they will go out there as victors. But the question remains whether it is right to lie Just to save someone from the terrible truth of life or not?

Does it Justify the act because it may lead to peace? Having plotted the situation in the film and having rendered it noble for a man to do such thing Just to have his child protected, white lies would then be acceptable in he society despite the fact that it still constitute lies. Lying is wrong, however, if these white lies, which aims to salvage the other by not telling the truth, were acceptable now a days, would these then be viewed as moral?

But wouldn't this corrupt the people's view regarding the evil of lies? In light of the technical norm, which has to do with the matter of survival and thus of the health and well being of human individual and the community (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 1), what Guide has done in order for his child to survive is right. His lies were Justified because those were for the good of his son and for him not to get killed in the concentration camp.

However, this act would run in conflict with the moral norm, which refers to the dignity of the human person (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 3). Lying, when viewed in this aspect would be wrong despite the fact that it is for the benefit of another person because the very act of not saying the truth entails deviation of man from the uncorrupted state of not lying. Since there lies a violation of the dignity of man, the act is Judged to be wrong. Another way of looking at the act done of Guide is through the lens of Moral Dimension.

One of its features is the sense of obligation, which signifies imperative, something one must or ought to do, or not in accordance with some rule or principle (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 93). In Guides situation, what one ought to do as a father and a husband is without a doubt to save his family from the horrors of the place they are in, so he lied to his son for him not to be frightened because this is what he believed must be done. He believes that the meaning of his existence is to be able to protect his family, especially his son.

So he resulted into lying, but he only did this with the purest intention and for the simple reason that he loves his child so much. But when analyzed in view of the tells, which is the search for truth and meaning of all things and the search in general for mutual recognition of consciousness referred to as love (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 89), it would certainly be an immoral act. Although his acts were moved by love for his son, e stole the truth from his child by not telling him the real reason why they were there.

His act of lying is a clear deviation from the orientation toward the tells, which is geared towards the ultimate meaning and communion of all consciousness (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 89), rendering his action to be bad. The final article to be used in analyzing the issue at hand is Plat's "Debauchery'. Here occurred the discussion of Socrates and Typhoon about the holy. Socrates pointed out that not all the Just are holy, only part of the Just is holy and the other is meeting else (Plato 2010, 13).

In light of this, one may infer that Guides act could be Just since it upholds the life of his child. By lying and keeping him from the Nazis, he was able to protect his child and save him from the possibility of early death. Although it would be rendered Just, it could not be rendered holy. This is so because According to Socrates, which was agreed by Typhoon, an act, to be holy must essentially be holy in whatever form and not merely because the gods loved it. Holiness must come first before it is loved.

Therefore, lying is not holy since goodness s not innate in the act itself even if the end goal was good. In conclusion, considering all the description of morality, lying itself is not in accordance to what is moral in the eyes of man or of the gods. Yet, when the reason for his lies is taken into further consideration, the act may seem Justifiable, but it does not necessitate that it is already morally right. Another thing worth noting is that morality is not Judged only in accordance with what one thinks is right or bad because this might result into one concluding that morality is relative.

This should to be the case because what is moral does not vary, what varies are the lenses used in analyzing the act done. Therefore, one must be critical in the analysis of an act in order not to render false Judgment.

Remember. This is just a sample.
You can get your custom paper from our expert writers

get custom paper

Cite this page

Philo Paper on Morality. (2017, Nov 20). Retrieved from

Not Finding What You Need?

Search for essay samples now

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

Your Deadline is Too Short?  Let Professional Writer Help You

Get Help From Writers