Reflection – Thank You for Smoking essay
The movie under consideration is entitled “Thank You for Smoking” and is a successful adaptation of the novel by Christopher Buckley. Jason Reitman’s media sharp satire deals with cigarette industry and a brilliant career of the tobacco lobby Nick Naylor, whose job is to present daily proof that there are no problems with tobacco indeed killing many each year. On continuing to defend them he promotes a cover anti-smoking advertising and wins several arguments demonstrating his moral flexibility. It is a true challenge to defend a controversial issue that is evidently harmful, analyze the issue and demonstrate it from another angle. Nick insists on tobacco being overreacted as a social issue and finds it important for everyone to decide for himself what is best. He has to do his job though it seemingly goes against what he believes as a young father. However, speaking to the audience in the assembly, the spokesman accentuates that tobacco education should be first and foremost at family level. He teaches his son that nothing can be totally proven and that the beauty of an argument is that if you argue correctly, you’re never wrong. Nick talks fluently of challenging things, but the climax is when he is straightly asked if he gives his son the first cigarette, he appears to lose part of himself at the very moment he acknowledges it. Nick demonstrates liberal tolerance and his toleration of his son’s future smoking contradicts with his moral obligation to his son to safeguard his life and health.
Thus, the spokesman violates the ethical to reestablish it later. He sacrifices his son’s future health for a greater ethical good, that is freedom of choice. He shows that he won’t compel his son act this or that and sacrifices his personal victory for the benefit of society. Freedom is high above that and his son’s health doesn’t outweigh the right of every citizen to make free choices. Nick’s job lies in making dangerous products like tobacco more appealing to the American public along with other members of the MOD Squad. But only he demonstrates how his own maxims and intentions contradict with his actions and results. On the one hand, he probably uses others as mere means in his scheme of action, during anti-tobacco advertising campaign or deceives people on TV show when he proves that tobacco industry wouldn’t like to lose its consumer and kill him by the example of a 15-year old boy dying from cancer. He gives his audience who doesn’t now his real maxim some false promises that he is not going to keep. On the other hand, the character acts beneficently as he tries to achieve what others want and lobbies freedom of choice, his beneficence being selective. Though we cannot say that from the very beginning his words express his true intentions, but according to the Formula of the End in Itself his intentions foster others ends and promote freedom of choice without any constrain. Nick Naylor definitely faces moral dilemma when human happiness demands the sacrifice of someone’s lives and welfare. Despite using his audience as mere means at first, his intention at the end is to bring them to happier result valuing the life and choice of each and every person. The character shows that no one should be an instrument and mere means in others hands, humans should be treated as ends in themselves for their own benefit.
Do you like this essay?
Our writers can write a paper like this for you!
(1 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...