Philo Paper on Morality

Life is Beautiful, a take aim by Roberto Benign, is a two- sh be film, the stolon part was purely comedy, the other brought smiles d angiotensin converting enzyme tears (Bert 1998). It is about a guy named mastermind Orifice, a Jew, who lived in Italy with his uncle during the time of the Nazis. He fell in love with a little girl named Dora, a Gentile, to whom he had his only son. He was a free-spirited man who forever has his way out of misery. He can always shed settle 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 small fry Joshua, were taken by the Fascist and Nazis and were brought in a assiduousness camp. So was Dora, who pleaded the officers to let her go with his family so she besides went aboard the train. There, Guide was still able to make up a story in order for his son non to be terrified. He told his son that they were dear in a big comp etition and they essential 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 small fry to believe that what he was saying was true, because all he say was about the competition since he really did not speak German. He to a fault went by means of 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.He risked his smell because his wifes and childs life are more precious to him than his So the main issue here that must be dealt with in comparison to lessonity and peace is he very act of Guide deceit 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 believe that some day they will go out there as victors. But the question remains whether it is right to lie Just t o give birth someone from the terrible fair play of life or not?Does it guarantee the act because it may lead to peace? Having plotted the situation in the film and having accedeed it noble for a man to do such intimacy Just to have his child protected, white lies would then be pleasant in he society despite the fact that it still fabricate lies. Lying is wrong, however, if these white lies, which aims to salvage the other by not relation the truth, were acceptable now a days, would these then be viewed as moral?But wouldnt this corrupt the peoples view regarding the evil of lies? In clean of the proficient norm, which has to do with the matter of survival and thus of the health and well organism of human individual and the community (Rexes, cause 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 dependable of his son and for him not to get killed in the concentration camp.H owever, this act would protract in conflict with the moral norm, which refers to the dignity of the human person (Rexes, domain 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 manufacturing. Since there lies a violation of the dignity of man, the act is Judged to be wrong. some other 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 conformance with some rule or regulation (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 pitch 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 wh at he believed must be done. He believes that the intend of his existence is to be able to protect his family, especially his son.So he resulted into lying, yet he only did this with the purest intention and for the simple campaign 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 course credit of consciousness referred to as love (Rexes, Ground and Norm of Morality 1989, 89), it would for sure be an immoral act. Although his acts were moved by love for his son, e take 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 druthers 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 member to be used in analyzing the issue at hand is Plats 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 fundamentally be holy in whatever form and not provided 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 interpretation of morality, lying itself is not in accordance to what is moral in the eye of man or of the gods. Yet, when the reason for his lie s is taken into further consideration, the act may seem Justifiable, but it does not necessitate that it is already morally right. some other 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 decisive in the analysis of an act in order not to render false Judgment.