Q&A: Cruelty for the Sake of Toughening
Cruelty for the Sake of Toughening
Question
In many armies it is customary for training to be marked by harsh treatment of recruits, with the intention of strengthening their resilience and accustoming them to discipline. My question is: is it moral to harm a person in order to benefit him (to toughen him up)? And is it moral to harm a soldier in order to benefit the state in the same way?
It seems that many people would reject the first possibility and justify the second. Perhaps because in the army this is a long training process, so one can ensure that it really does lead to good results, or because military service is seen as a necessity of the state and an obligation on the soldier.
Answer
Whatever the experts deem necessary in order to develop combat abilities is probably permitted. Humiliations are not necessary, but effort and discipline are.
Discussion on Answer
That’s too general. There are situations where it is obviously fine and others where it isn’t. It’s hard to draw a general line.
Thank you
And what about the civilian world, or parents in relation to their children?