What stands out to me is that they don't just go against the utilitarian argument - it's violently rejected.
That's more normal than you might think.
During WWII, someone did a survey to see how airmen felt about lightening the structure of the B-17 bomber. The weight saved could have gone to more armor, more defensive guns, more payload (thus fewer repeated missions, thus less exposure to AA and enemy fighters). Almost all were against it. The airmen were willing to trade more active defenses for the passive defense of knowing that the plane would not fall apart on them.
As the B-17's frame, so we too prefer the somewhat passive security of knowing we are loved and wanted by our fellow soldiers/citizens. "No man left behind" is not just a slogan, it is a solemn promise. So, too, was George S. Patton's grim dictum to his staff when 3rd Army stalled, trying to relieve Bastogne in the Battle of the Bulge an expression of this solidarity:
Patton: "We're gonna keep fighting. Is that clear?! We're gonna attack all night, we're gonna attack the next morning. If we are not victorious… let no man come back alive."
When three firemen die getting a child out of a burning building, that is this spirit in action. That being said, sometimes it takes a certain amount of training to overcome this; to see that abandoning some casualties now will mean avoiding or saving more in the future. But no one likes it. The military will brag about "no man left behind." No one ever feels like bragging about violating that rule, even if it could be proved that it was the right thing to do.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
chiming
Re: Good Discussion - Dives In...
Date: 2007-02-01 10:21 pm (UTC)From:That's more normal than you might think.
During WWII, someone did a survey to see how airmen felt about lightening the structure of the B-17 bomber. The weight saved could have gone to more armor, more defensive guns, more payload (thus fewer repeated missions, thus less exposure to AA and enemy fighters). Almost all were against it. The airmen were willing to trade more active defenses for the passive defense of knowing that the plane would not fall apart on them.
As the B-17's frame, so we too prefer the somewhat passive security of knowing we are loved and wanted by our fellow soldiers/citizens. "No man left behind" is not just a slogan, it is a solemn promise. So, too, was George S. Patton's grim dictum to his staff when 3rd Army stalled, trying to relieve Bastogne in the Battle of the Bulge an expression of this solidarity:
Patton: "We're gonna keep fighting. Is that clear?! We're gonna attack all night, we're gonna attack the next morning. If we are not victorious… let no man come back alive."
When three firemen die getting a child out of a burning building, that is this spirit in action. That being said, sometimes it takes a certain amount of training to overcome this; to see that abandoning some casualties now will mean avoiding or saving more in the future. But no one likes it. The military will brag about "no man left behind." No one ever feels like bragging about violating that rule, even if it could be proved that it was the right thing to do.