Posted on Jul 20, 2017
LTC Orlando Illi
7.23K
66
37
7
7
0
Posted in these groups: Officers logo OfficersEthics logo EthicsImages 20 NCOs
Avatar feed
Responses: 15
CPT Jack Durish
5
5
0
Please define the terms of the discussion. "Situational ethics" can mean vastly different things to different people.
(5)
Comment
(0)
LTC Orlando Illi
LTC Orlando Illi
7 y
CPT Jack Durish - this is a prime example of abdicating ethics and morality. I have struggled to understand how this could have occurred in a civilized society. I have read the books, discussed this with German Officers at NATO and in the United States as well as my College Professors with no real answer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einsatzgruppen
(1)
Reply
(0)
PO2 (Other / Not listed)
PO2 (Join to see)
7 y
The thing is, whatever options you choose in war are opened for use by the enemy. For instance, in a senate discussion (hearing?) about whether President Bush authorized waterboarding one congressman stated that if we did it to their boys they could do it to our sons and daughters.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Cpl John Barker
Cpl John Barker
7 y
Keep loyal to your men; remember Nichilo Machiavelli was killed by the state
(0)
Reply
(0)
Maj John Bell
Maj John Bell
7 y
2983f0ff
PO2 (Join to see) - "If we do it, they can do it" is not and never was the prime motivator behind humane treatment of prisoners. When have we engaged in warfare against an enemy that followed the laws of land warfare as they pertain to POW's?

Remember when ISIS burned the Jordanian pilot in a cage. Who would be taken alive by ISIS? How many of the bastards would you take with you to hell before you surrendered. We treat prisoners well to preserve the lives of our men and women who are capturing prisoners instead of getting killed by combatants that would rather die than surrender.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Sgt Brendan Bigney
4
4
0
Edited 7 y ago
I think that's something that just comes with leadership. It's not all black and white. Much of the time there is a lot of gray as well as the priorities. You do one thing and it has consequences, you do another thing and that too comes with its own set of consequences. If it were all black and white then we would be going down a dangerous path. If there was always a definitive answer there wouldn't be a need for leaders.
But your ethics shouldn't go out the door.
(4)
Comment
(0)
SGM Chief Executive Officer (Ceo)
SGM (Join to see)
7 y
That's what we call an ethical dilemma. Whenever either of two choices has some negative consequences, it creates an ethical dilemma for us. We have to make a decision based on either criteria we've thought about before, or come up with our own criteria on the spot. This is where you might have heard about "the most good" or "good for the most people" or "harms the fewest people" or does the least harm." These are some of the criteria people use to resolve ethical dilemmas. The grey areas are what leaders really get paid for; the black/white areas are easiest for anyone to resolve, but the grey areas are the real challenges. Great comment, Sgt Brendan Bigney!
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Robert Perrotto
4
4
0
need context for this question - are you asking something like - one of your soldiers shoots and kills someone breaking in to their home as opposed to a soldier shooting and killing someone breaking his car windshield?
(4)
Comment
(0)
LTC Orlando Illi
LTC Orlando Illi
7 y
My question was more in tune with the fact that in 1513 Niccolo Machiavelli published a book titled "The Prince". His thesis that "...the the end justifies the means...." has become synonymous with a leader abdicating morality and ethics in the pursuit of power. Machiavelli opined that we can easily sacrifice our ethics to achieve what we see as a necessary end. Thus, as leaders we are in a constant struggle to maintain an ethical code at the expense of expediency. That struggle is very real and adhering to an ethical is not always easy.This is the context from where my question come from
(2)
Reply
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
SSG Robert Perrotto
7 y
perhaps I should be a little less with the reference - are you asking something like getting your humvee out for a mission with the fire extenguisher a day out of tolerance as opposed to it being months out of tolerance? while both are wrong, and should never happen, the sad truth is it does occur, and at that point an ethical decision needs to made.
(3)
Reply
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
SSG Robert Perrotto
7 y
LTC Orlando Illi - ok - thanks for clarifying - in that context the answer is an adamant no, at least when it came to my personal standards, the ends do not justify the means. Iin the scenario I gave with the fire extiguishers, it is a deadline, thus the vehicle could not go, have I been over ruled on something like that, absolutely, but I know that I did the hard right over the easy wrong.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
SSG Robert Perrotto
7 y
utilizing the ideology of Machiavelli would make us no better than the people and groups that we oppose, it justifies any atrocity committed in the name of the end goal. Nuking Bagdhad to eliminate Hussein would fall into that.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Avatar feed
Are Situational Ethics ever warranted for Officers or NCO?
Col Joseph Lenertz
3
3
0
I think Ethics should be a mandatory part of every officer's professional education. Professor Wakin was my professor of Ethics at USAFA. I will never forget him. I highly recommend his book. His thesis is an absolute rejection of Machiavelli's.
https://www.amazon.com/Morality-Military-Profession-Malham-Wakin/dp/ [login to see]
(3)
Comment
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
SSG Robert Perrotto
7 y
Sir, I would not limit ethics to just officers, but include it at every level of professional development through out the ranks
(5)
Reply
(0)
Col Joseph Lenertz
Col Joseph Lenertz
7 y
SSG Robert Perrotto - I agree, ethics cannot be limited to officers. I just don't feel qualified to speak to NCO professional education requirements.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SGM Chief Executive Officer (Ceo)
SGM (Join to see)
7 y
It's very difficult to 'teach' ethics as a topic by itself. Ethics are so integrated with philosophy you can't really understand ethics without at least a basic understanding of the philosophical underpinnings. Ethics is also later connected to the law, in practice, so without understanding some of the legal aspects of ethical decision making, it's difficult to understand the practical application of ethics in peacetime and in war. It's hard to roll all that up into a one- or two-hour block of instruction at C&GSC or ANCOC (I don't have the new name at hand).
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Orlando Illi
3
3
0
Edited 7 y ago
My question was more in tune with the fact that in 1513 Niccolo Machiavelli published a book titled "The Prince". His thesis that "...the the end justifies the means...." has become synonymous with a leader abdicating morality and ethics in the pursuit of power. Machiavelli opined that we can easily sacrifice our ethics to achieve what we see as a necessary end. Thus, as leaders we are in a constant struggle to maintain an ethical code at the expense of expediency. That struggle is very real and adhering to an ethical code is not always easy.This is the context from where my question come from
(3)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Erik Marquez
3
3
0
Edited 7 y ago
LTC Orlando Illi "Situational Ethics"
Sir, You would need to define that phrase and provide context, for others to provide an opinion that is relevant.
(3)
Comment
(0)
LTC Orlando Illi
LTC Orlando Illi
7 y
My question was more in tune with the fact that in 1513 Niccolo Machiavelli published a book titled "The Prince". His thesis that "...the the end justifies the means...." has become synonymous with a leader abdicating morality and ethics in the pursuit of power. Machiavelli opined that we can easily sacrifice our ethics to achieve what we see as a necessary end. Thus, as leaders we are in a constant struggle to maintain an ethical code at the expense of expediency. That struggle is very real and adhering to an ethical is not always easy.This is the context from where my question come from
(3)
Reply
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
SGM Erik Marquez
7 y
Then the answer is NO, as hard as that can be.. Sacrificing ethics for the sake of power or expediency is not ok.
In other scenarios it can be perceived "Situational Ethics" but I opine it is appropriate actions for one scenario that would be inappropriate (unethical) in another.

Active threat update that states two bases have been hit by insider threat civilians workers using women and suicide vests this morning.
Scenario 1:
Shooting a woman as she approaches the front gate in daylight, told to halt in her native language, yet continues to approach.. you have standoff and reasonable protection from the largest suicide vest that could be hidden under her dress.
Scenario 2:
Shooting a woman as she approaches the front gate in daylight, told to halt in her native language, yet continues to approach.. you have NO standoff and NO barrier between her and your men, plus a high value target of civilian male laborers receiving pay for the week, and no protection from the largest suicide vest that could be hidden under her dress.
I perceive one of those Scenarios as unneeded and unethical to engage the potential threat (flat view, more data, time perceived actions could change the decision) and the second Scenario to be likely justified.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MSgt Jason McClish
2
2
0
In my opinion, it's a simple no. Ethics must be followed and strictly adhered to at all time. It's never ok to commit a crime, regardless of the circumstances. If a superior gives a subordinate an order that is unethical or criminal, it's the subordinate's duty to "disobey" the order and report it back through the chain of command to the best of his/her ability. Subordinates are to never blindly follow orders of this nature, as they will be charged with crimes themselves. "I didn't know" or "I was just following orders" never prevails in court and hasn't in several decades. Do the right thing.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SGT English/Language Arts Teacher
2
2
0
Edited 7 y ago
In their treatment or the treatment of their subordinates?
(2)
Comment
(0)
LTC Orlando Illi
LTC Orlando Illi
7 y
My question was more in tune with the fact that in 1513 Niccolo Machiavelli published a book titled "The Prince". His thesis that "...the the end justifies the means...." has become synonymous with a leader abdicating morality and ethics in the pursuit of power. Machiavelli opined that we can easily sacrifice our ethics to achieve what we see as a necessary end. Thus, as leaders we are in a constant struggle to maintain an ethical code at the expense of expediency. That struggle is very real and adhering to an ethical is not always easy.This is the context from where my question come from
(2)
Reply
(0)
SGT English/Language Arts Teacher
SGT (Join to see)
7 y
LTC Orlando Illi - Thank you for clarifying. My understanding of situation ethics is more in line with Christian writers like Bonhoeffer and Niebuhr where agape, or unconditional love, should be a consideration for our actions in relation to moral laws. Under these ideals personal enrichment or power is not a consideration.

As an example: Suicide, or the killing of oneself, is a moral imperative, and sometimes a law, that is prohibited by some as an absolute. If you are in a a situation that you willingly give up your life for another, is that still suicide? Some would say that is absolutely killing oneself and is prohibited. However, most of us would grant that is more of a sacrifice and altruism; therefore, we grant pardon for those who knowingly do that. That would be an example of agape, unconditional love. "He hath no greater love than to lay down his life for another." There is the famous example of a situation in which a man has cancer and is told that if he takes pills he has several years to live (he knows he will still die), but if he does not he will die in six months. He has an insurance policy which will expire in a year providing his family with security to live without him. What does he do? Tough call.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
PO3 Mitchell Haynie
1
1
0
If the question regards basic fundamental characteristics of "Ethical" thought or action, then by its mere intent it cannot be situational, or it has no fidelity in its own meaning. Ethics are tied to a specific set of values, beliefs, rules or behaviors that are considered "acceptable", hence if we apply those differently depending on the circumstances then that fidelity to those original reasons are lost.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PFC Eric Parrish
1
1
0
Even though we would all like to be ethical at all times. At some points in time accomplishing the mission takes precedence to our personal beliefs. I still think everyone should be as ethical as possible and strive to have a good moral compass.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close