Individuals value physical survival over moral survival when encountering conflict. When involved in a conflict, individuals will often have to choose from a myriad of decisions. There is a wide array of factors influencing one’s decision in a conflict. It is part of natural human behavior to favor physical survival when threatened with danger. Additionally, in order to maintain power, people may forsake their values, casting a blanket over any truth that may compromise their power or influence.
However, one’s moral values may take priority over physical integrity, endangering or sacrificing their lives in he name of their values. Some individuals may value physical survival above all else. It is instinctive to protect one’s physical integrity when it is at risk. However, the decision to protect oneself may result in possible loss Of life for others. Soldiers who choose to abandon their duties and desert their allies can possibly cause loss of life. Leaving their fellow soldiers in favor of self -preservation may result in a compromise in military operations and a subsequent loss of life.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
Individuals may also be willing to betray the trust of others to save themselves, despite the lack of any immediate threat. Nina hostile environment, people may find themselves compromising the mutual trust they share with others to guarantee personal safety. In prison environments, prison “snitches” betray the trust they share with their cellmates in favor of possible luxuries or reduced sentences. By proportioning a better chance of survival in a hostile environment , prison “snitches” may put cellmates through possible suffering.
Additionally when faced with an immediate danger, people may immediately attempt to avoid physical strife at the cost of their ideals. Galileo chose to recant his scientific values when aced with torture from the Inquisition, as he was “afraid of physical pain. ” The prevalence of a physical threat aroused fear in him, causing him to immediately recant his views when presented with the “instruments of torture. ” Human instincts cause individuals to immediately avoid physical strife, but at the cost of their morals.
However, an immediate threat of danger is not always necessary, sometimes the pressures of a hostile environment may cause people to compromise their morals. In order to maintain power, people mat forsake their morals. When faced with the Seibel loss of power, authorities may take all types of measures necessary to maintain it. The “self-interested rulers” in Galileo times attempt to prevent any dissent by casting a blanket of silence over any threat to their rule, accusing all such dissenters of heresy.
The church’s actions appear as “noble motherly love,” but in truth, the church is silencing any resistance to its power. In order to minimize even the possibility of resistance, governing bodies may censor the truth, lying to and manipulating people. In Rowel’s “1984,” Oceania enforces their influence over the people through the implementation of “Newsweek. ” By removing any possible communication, Oceania oppresses the people, forcing them to live a life “Big Brother” approves.
Dictators in modern times also mistreat their population, forsaking compassion for their people in favor of maintaining power. In North Korea, the regime starves their people, choosing to allocate their resources to defense. Any opposition is faced with execution, thus oppressing citizens who defy North Korean rule. By spending money on military reinforcement instead of helping their people, the North Korean government violates the socialist ideals of equality it stands for. In order to maintain power, the powerful mistreat and oppress their people, defying their political beliefs.
By forsaking their duty to their country, authorities end up maintaining physical integrity, whilst lying to their people and censoring all questions and resistance. However, it is possible for individuals to value moral survival over life and limb. People may be willing to endanger or sacrifice their lives in the name of their ideals. When faced with the immediate threat of death, people may face it to defend their values. When faced with the threat of death from he Taliban, Mammal chose to continue fighting for the education of women in Pakistan.
Mammal’s dedication to these women overwhelmed her desire to flee or surrender to the Taliban, exhibiting that dedication to one’s ideals can eliminate the instinct to protect ones own self. Even when faced with the guarantee of safety, people may choose to sacrifice themselves rather than abandon their ideals. Socrates was presented with the opportunity to escape from prison before his execution but instead, chose to be executed as leaving meant an abandonment of his ideals. Socrates’ sacrifice in the name of his deals demonstrated that some people are willing to sacrifice their lives in order to maintain their principles.