Relativism and Absolutism in the Films Crimes and Misdemeanors and A Clockwork Orange - Essay Example

Ethics in Cinema Introduction Ethics being a branch of philosophy has the man examining questions of morality which involves whether something is right or wrong. This also has to do with what is the effect of acting in a certain manner. For this reason, there are factors which help us make moral judgments. To help us understand this fact, philosophers divide this subject into moral universalism and moral relativism. Whenever somebody acts by doing something, there will be a result which may affect the person, various people or even the agent. The ethical position of this argument is whether the person who has performed the act has consequential effects on people’s interests. For this reason, if a person conducts an act that reflects the right motive and good consequences it is normally perceived as flourishing moments and success. However, this does not mean that the consequences will not be there. In this case the paper seeks to analyze relativism and absolutism in the films Crimes and Misdemeanors and A Clockwork Orange. Relativism vs Universalism There has been a conflict between objective theory and relativist theory in ethics. However, there is a clear distinguishing explanation which describes the absolutist theory as the degree of right and wrong from an objective point of view which should not change according to culture. Relativism is defined according to the Mariam Webster dictionary as a theory that knowledge is relative to the limited nature of the mind and the conditions of knowing. The same dictionary also defines relativism as a view of ethical truth which may vary to personal conviction, cultural characteristic and differing religious beliefs (Gardiner). Deontological reasoning states that certain things are wrong and right in themselves if they possess the intrinsic value. On the other hand relativist theory states that there is no universal valid moral principle. This is because we come from different cultures and that all the principles will therefore vary depending in the culture or age. This is a teological argument which means that there is no such good in itself. However, if an action deem good to you and bad to me, then there is no need for both of us finding out the truth. From the film Crimes and Misdemeanors the author says, “It’s a fundamental difference in the way we view the world. You see it as harsh and empty of values and pitiless. And I couldn’t go on living if I didn’t feel it with all my heart a moral structure, with real meaning, and forgiveness, and a higher power, otherwise there’s no basis to live” (Landau). From this statement we can conclude that life is morally universal. According to the author there is no basis for life. This indicates that the author finds no basis for life if he cannot find a moral structure in his heart. According to moral universalism we find meaning to life if we can attach certain values in our hearts and live towards them. . This means that this argument is based on absolute law and does not weigh any condition or reasoning behind the action. We also encounter similar thoughts from Jack in the film who says, “What good is the law if it prevents me from receiving justice? Is what shes doing to me just? Is this what I deserve”? we realize that the author is focusing on the universalism theory. This is because there is a basis for complaint and the author finds a reason for complaint. After Allen successfully kills the woman who threatened to reveal his affair and ruin his marriage he feels guilty. Feeling guilty is a sign of a moral virtue. Virtue ethics is concerned with the individual character and not so much on the ethical duties and rules with the consequences of the action. This means that virtual ethics explores the extent to which an individual deals with ethical dilemmas. Allen feels guilty since he believes on the universal law that says that when something is wrong to you it is also wrong to me. This is because the society view murders as a wrong act hence the guilt. Ironically, the guilt later diminishes and he feels nothing over his murder. He does not inform the police and he continues prospering in his life. According to the consequentialist theorist Jeremy Bentahm, the degree of right and wrong is measured in terms of the utilitarian rule which says that, “action is best that produces the greatest good for the greatest number” (Russell). This means that the criterion of the right is an action that is creating harm to small people and benefitting a larger number of people. However, this was not the case and therefore according to ethical egoism theory that suggests human beings should act on their own best interest and so did Allen. On the contrary incidences of relativism have also been expressed in the films. For example, the author says, “Now the unique thing that happened to the early Israelites was that they conceived a God that cares. He cares, but at the same time he also demands that you behave morally. But here comes the paradox. What’s one of the first things that that God asks: that God asks Abraham to sacrifice his only son, his beloved son to him. In other words, in spite of millennia of efforts we have not succeeded to create a really and entirely loving image of God. This was beyond our capacity to imagine”. From this excerpt alone we are able to capture the relativity of this statement. The author asserts that despite God being caring He also changes sometimes and demands to see our good moral actions. This is because there is no fixed moral code that is valid according to the relativists. From the film A Clockwork Orange the pastor wonders, “The question is whether or not this technique really makes a man good. Goodness comes from within. Goodness is chosen”. This was when Alex volunteered to be used as a specimen for a certain experiment to determine the effects of violent movies on juvenile deliquesces. When Alex shows an improvement in character the priests wonder why the technique has been successful in reforming Alex. According to him Alex’s goodness was not coming from within and he thought it was as an influence of the violent movies. This is an indication that the priest is operating under the universal moral theory which believes if something is wrong to you it is similarly wrong to you and therefore personal virtue is responsible for our transformation. He could not believe that the Alex has changed. The prison chaplain argues, “Alex has been robbed of his God-given freewill, he ceases to be a wrongdoer he also ceases to be a creature capable of moral choice”. This conversation gets interesting when the prison governor who reasons from the moral relativism perspective replies by telling the chaplain that, “we are not interested in the higher ethics but with cutting down crime cases and relieving the ghastly congestion in our prisons” (DeLarge). Conclusion From these two films it is evident that the authors have been successfully in integrating the value of ethics in both of their works. Both films successfully express incidences of universalism and relativism. The expression of these two contrasting theories has been used by the authors to highlight the different perspective that philosophers use. These theories have also been used as powerful tools we use in our general lives without sometimes realizing that we are applying them. Works Cited A Clockwork Orange. Dir. Stanley Kubrick. Perf. Alex DeLarge. 1971. Crimes and Misdemeanors. Dir. Woody Allen. Perf. Martin Landau. 1989. Gardiner, ed., Stephen M. Virtue Ethics, Old and New. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005. Russell, ed., Daniel C. The Cambridge Companion to Virtue Ethics. New York: Cambridge University Press., 2013. Read More