Overview

The movie starts indicating abduction of Hellene’s daughter and her beloved doll “Mirabelle.” It forces Patrick, to be hired as one of the principal investigators. The author goes ahead to indicate that Patrick and Angie are appointed by the kid’s aunt, Beatrice to find her. In the investigation process, Helene identified that she is a thoughtless and deserting mother. It is clear from the movie that Helen could abandon her daughter for up to 2hours as she gets involved in the business at the bar including drug smuggling (Atherton, Matthew). As Patrick digs into the Boston crime, it turns out that Helens had a boyfriend named Skinny Ray and they were drug peddlers for the local Haitian drug aristocrat and Helen had stolen about $130,000 from her boyfriend. According to Patrick, the above could be the core cause of why the kid was abducted.

It is later identified that Jack Doyle who was Skinny’s associate that abducted Helen’s daughter. According to what is distinguished from the movie, Jack’s reason for seizing the kid was for the kid to have an actual home (Atherton, Matthew). But when Patrick identifies the reason why Jack abducted Helen’s daughter, he becomes furious and comes up with a severe judgment for Jack. Some questions run in his head. He asks himself whether he could allow jack to retain the girl and make the girl apart of his life? Or would he turn him in to the police for child abduction having that Helen didn’t give her the life she ever deserved? Finally, Patrick decides that the most appropriate way to go about the case is to report Jack to the authorities to ensure that Helene’s gets her daughter back.

Analysis of the story using Kant’s View

There is a dilemma to decide whether Jack is doing an appropriate or inappropriate thing for a right or ill motives. To explain the above difficulty, Immanuel Kant argues that the only right way to when it comes to the aspect of doing right is doing proper things for the right reasons. He looks at the question from the action of duty point of view. According to him, the concept of duty involves goodwill which is limited to some specific levels (Butler, Clark). The above implies that the action is promoted by an individual who needs to do good basing their actions on responsibility. In his argument, he states that acting out duty does not necessarily imply poor performance of one’s duty. The reason that makes personal action to be based on function is that commitment guides an individual on how to undertake the right things out of right motives. According to Kant, acting merely out of duty is not good enough just because it may result in an individual doing appropriate actions for wrong objectives (Frierson, Patrick 4). According to him, the only validated approach is acting out of responsibility.

Kant’s opinion according to me is absolute, and it adequately explains the case at hand (Butler, Clark). He uses ethical philosophy to describe all aspects surrounding the notional of the moral law and the duty as an act that is meant to respect the moral law. The bill is absolute, cogent and general. It can be argued that moral code is the sovereign of the individual needs. Kant believes that the moral code is one of the self-sufficient laws that need to be respected (Butler, Clark).

Works Cited

Frierson, Patrick R. “Kant, Immanuel (1724–1804): Influence on the Origins and Development of Anthropology.” The International Encyclopedia of Anthropology (2018): 1-4.

Butler, Clark. “Human Rights Ethics: A Contemporary Normative Ethical Theory.” Proceedings of the XXIII World Congress of Philosophy. Vol. 12. 2018.

Atherton, Matthew C. “Teaching Through Film: Utilizing Popular Criminology in the Classroom.” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching 24.2 (2013).

Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?