I believe that Immanuel Kant would see Carter Druse’s action of hiting his male parent as moral. Kant was an ethician that believed that morality was based on responsibility. that moralss is absolute. non conditional. and is based on ground. non feelings. ( Pojman. Vaughn 309 ) That is precisely the quandary that Ambrose Bierce writes Carter Druse into in the short narrative A Horseman in the Sky. I feel there are several parts of the narrative that flip back and Forth between being moral and non being moral or possibly the better words would be that it is dry on many degrees.
The narrative begins with Carter Druse being referred to as a felon for being asleep on his station: ?The bunch of laurel in which the felon lay’ ( Pojman. Vaughn 356 ) yet some may reason that a boy hiting his male parent is immoral and condemnable no affair in wartime or non. In maintaining with Kantian thought and philosphy. I think it is the perfect illustration of seting aside emotions and establishing a determination soley on ground and responsibility. It’s dry that the thing that ?rouses him from his province of crime’ ( Pojman. Vaughn 358 ) is the Equus caballus that his male parent is on.
He hesitates to hit the enemy soldier because of the beauty of the scene ; the Equus caballus. the vale. and the sky. Carter Druse ponders if it is so awful to kill the enemy during war. ( Pojman. Vaughn 358 ) Kant felt that it was responsibility to the It is dry that Carter Druse’s determination to non fall in the Hosts with his male parent could be seen as a treachery of responsibility to his male parent and to his Deontological ethician which is based on responsibility.