With utility and consequences valued
so much in Western society at least as of 2012, when the film, Flight, was released, the
story-world of the film may seem odd in that doing what’s right comes out on
top, even at the expense of knowingly losing benefits and incurring costs
personally. In other words, deciding on the basis of conscience even at the
expense of good consequences for oneself is possible even in a culture in which
“saving one’s skin” rather than doing what is right is the norm. By immersing
viewers in a story-world, a narrative with well-developed characters can
highlight a societal blind-spot, and thus potentially result in a better
society in which people make the effort to re-value their ethical values to the
extent that their dominant values support consequentialism above standing on
principle even though bad consequences for oneself can be anticipated. In the
film, 96 out of 102 of the people on board survive the plane crash even though
the metal bird had been in an uncontrolled vertical fall from 30,000 feet. How
could the captain not be seen as a hero? If all that matters are results, 96
out of 102 is not bad at all, and being able to get out of a dive even as the
tail stabilizer keeps pointing the plane downward is extraordinary.
The full essay is at "Flight."
