Is Being Heroic Ethically Wrong?

An ongoing philosophical debate has been triggered by the recent release of the movie World War Z (2013). The vast majority labels the act of killing to be a heinous offense, making no exception to suicide. Religious sects in particular deem it extremely selfish, equating it to spitting in the Lords’ face. However with all colossal controversies throughout society, lies a rule for exception. An example of such an exception is brought up in the movie World War Z; where killing ones’ self for the greater good is ethically acceptable.

            The film surrounds a zombie apocalypse that is threatening to destroy humanity in its entirety. Main character Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt), works as an investigator for the United Nations and is hired to fight in a World War against the rampaging mindless zombies. His mission sends him all over the world in search of a counteragent capable to end the pandemic. While fleeing the zombie infested city of Jerusalem, Gerry notices that an old man and an emaciated boy are ignored by a fierce storm of voracious zombies. Upon arrival at a secure facility, Gerry is able to organize his thoughts and produce a logical theory. After much contemplation, he realizes the infected zombies do not bite those who are seriously injured or terminally ill. His theoretical reasoning stems from a biological standpoint; zombies act as obligate parasites requiring them to have a suitable host cell for viral reproduction. Terminally ill or injured subjects cannot provide a suitable host cell, thus the zombies ignore them.

            Despite its unprecedented logic and development, the fact remains that it is only a theory. According to scientific law, any theory cannot be proven true until it is tested. Hence a life threatening internal argument arises. If Gerry injects himself with a terminal pathogen and fails, the zombies will foresee his annihilation. Granted it is a success, the potentially fatal pathogen injection could result in Gerry’s’ demise. As a result of his sacrifice, the human race would have finally discovered the key to ending World War Z.

           Gerry took a Kantian approach of good-will towards the presented situation, utilizing the idea that motivations are not self-seeking (Salazar, 2). Well aware of what lay ahead, he injected himself with the suicidal pathogen prepared for either scenario to unravel. Although committing suicide clashes with the norms of society, those involved appeared rather accepting of the situation. Moreover the suicidal actions were deemed acceptable through the justification of saving humanity. Once the apocalypse hit and infection spread, society began to slowly fall apart.  Due to the unfortunate plague, the morals and values people once held no longer applied. In such extreme circumstances exceptions are made to the rules of society, creating an atmosphere that embraced Gerry’s risk of suicide. When the survival of the human race is at stake, its people will go to tremendous measures to ensure its preservation.

                                                              References

Salazar, Heather. "Kantian Business Ethics," in Business in Ethical Focus, ed. Fritz Allhoff and Anand J. Vaidya. Broadview Press, 2008

All photographs were taken from Google Images.