I watched the Fox show "24" for the very first time last night. I am hooked. Not only is the show fast paced (a colossal understatement), but it presents some excellent material for worldview thinking. Moral dilemmas abounded in the episode I watched last night. Melinda at STR explains why those who are interested in ethical theory and worldview analysis should really like this show.
You know, from what I have seen (and not much becasue I cannot stand Sutherland'a acting for some reason), there aren't any real moral dilemma's -- the good guiys are always right in what they do, and their problems never stem from their own actions.
Posted by: kevin | May 25, 2005 at 13:18
Kevin, I have never been a big Sutherland fan (indifferent mostly).
I could not disagree with you more (obviously) on your take of the moral dilemmas.
Bauer's decision to submit to a lifetime in a Chinese labor camp for the good of the country not an ethical call?
Palmer's decision to grant immunity to someone who attempted to kill him not an ethical call?
The security advisor's decision to take out Jack not an ethical call?
Individuals were wrestling with choosing selfishness over the greater good throughout the show. The show was dripping with hard choices all over the place. The greater good theory of ethics was put to the test.
What I found, at least on the part of Bauer, was consistency in his ethical reasoning. Being consistent does not mean one is free from making hard moral choices.
Posted by: Jeff | May 25, 2005 at 13:32
Leah and I have been big fans of 24 since Season 2. (We missed Season 1 but quickly rented it on DVD once we were hooked on the second season.) I do enjoy the ethical dilemmas and I appreciate Jack Bauer's (Sutherland) consistency in his decisions.
I think Kevin's (first comment) feelings stem from the fact that the decisions Bauer and his CTU buddies make are rarely wrong. I agree that the writers could do a better job of allowing characters to make selfish decisions or at least make the wrestling match between choices far tougher. Last season, the writers did have Tony Almeida make the wrong choice, saving his wife by letting the criminal escape.
One issue that bothers me is the speed with which CTU tortures suspects. There is little wrestling with that issue before the decision to proceed is made. And, of course, those tortured always turn out to be guilty of withholding something. Shouldn't the speed with which torture is used be a huge dilemma? What gives anyone the right to torture suspects?
Posted by: Jason Clarke | May 25, 2005 at 14:05
Jason,
You make a very good point about torture. I confess that I struggle with the questions you raise. Bauer in last night's episode threatened to kill the suspect on the spot if she did not cooperate -- kind of the same as torturing.
Since it was the first episode I had ever seen, and I had no prior "baggage" towards the female terrorist, I found Bauer's behavior to border on abusive. What is more, the terrorist kind of looked like Monica from Friends -- so Bauer's treatment seemed way over the top. My friend who was watching the show with me assured me that she was really, really bad. She did have a gun and was holding it to the good guy's head -- so I took my friend's word for it :-)
Anyway ... I digress ... your points about torture are very valid, Jason. Great moral questions. I am going to ponder them.
Posted by: Jeff | May 25, 2005 at 15:44
I agree with those saying dilemmas are presented on 24 but also that Bauer decisions rarely end up being critiqued. Bauer's willingness to behead the witness in episode 1 of season 2 is not presented as "okay", but Bauer's justification after the fact defines things going forward. Similarly, his execution of Chappelle in Season 3 is also a gut-wrenching dilemma but that is portrayed afterwards as justified. Bauer, like Donald Trump before he fires, repeatedly says, "I have no choice." Remarkable statement for characters who really do have just that: choice.
I also agree that CTU resorts to torture much too quickly, reflecting little "dilemma" about that tactic.
But what a fun show. We call it "Visual Crack."
Posted by: Glenn | May 25, 2005 at 16:20
Glenn,
You have convinced me that I need to go rent the first three seasons and catch up with you. I never heard of this series until four days ago. I am not a big TV watcher ... but this show seems to present interesting scenarios as your comments attest to.
Posted by: Jeff | May 25, 2005 at 17:04
The torture thing bothers me too. Not only is everyone deserving of tirture, as far as I an tell, but it never proves counter productive. In Algeria, for example, French troops tortured a man suspecte dof being a terrorist. They needed information quickly - -btu they never wentthrough his belonging. the information they needed was written down on a scrap of paper in his pocket. There is nothing like that -- or like the false information Algerian terrorsts provided to the French under torture that got the French to destroy the moderate Algerian opposition for the terrorists -- evident in any of the shows that I have seen, or any of the synopis.
I guess its nto so much that they don;t have ethical dilemma's - its jsut that they have the most shallow ethical dilemma's on TV. BSG, in my opinion, handles the question of ethical dilemmas much better -- and even takes matters of faith and belief seriously, Jeff. You might like it.
Posted by: kevin | May 27, 2005 at 11:07
Time to embarrass myself once again ... I don't watch much TV ... what is BSG?
Posted by: Jeff | May 27, 2005 at 11:17
I agree Jeff. I expect you are a season ahead of us here. But when I watched the last season here I kept thinking about the ethical dilemmas and the speed at which decisions were made. Sutherland is an addict in that series - it was like he was trying to dull out his grief and his conscience. There's a scene where he executes his boss to appease a terrorist. It was chilling really because it was done so mechanically and it really made me think about how consciences get seared. People can do certain things without seeming to have the huge crisis of conscience one would expect.
It was a classic ethical dilemma - and the way it was dealt with was disturbing. But I "like" the show because it is real in a way - people do choose their response to dilemmas from habit sometimes I think.
Posted by: Catez | May 29, 2005 at 00:25
Jeff,
WARNING! I started watching 24 a few months ago and bought season one on DVD. The next two weeks of my life was spent with the moral dilemma of getting my work done or watching "just a little more" of a 24 episode. Be careful.
It is a great show. Watching it without commercials makes it even better.
Serge
Posted by: Serge | May 31, 2005 at 15:22