Ethical Analysis of Colonel Jessup’s Behavior in “A Few Good Men”

Introduction

Colonel Jessup, played by Jack Nicholson in the 1992 film A Few Good Men, faces an ethical conundrum that captures the conflict between morality and military duty. This essay will examine Jessup’s actions through utilitarianism, ethical leadership, and Kantian deontology, assess the morality of his choices, and suggest other strategies for resolving the issue. From analyzing Jessup’s choice from these angles, it is clear that it is unethical for him to prioritize unit cohesiveness over individual rights.

Ethical Analysis of the Colonel Jessup Character

Colonel Jessup faces an ethical conundrum because he believes maintaining discipline in the military is essential, even at the expense of drastic measures. Namely, a Marine by the name of Santiago is given an extrajudicial “Code Red” by Jessup, which results in Santiago’s death (Reiner, 1992). Jessup’s predicament stems from his dedication to the Marine Corps’ tenet of “unit, corps, God, country,” which he understands to mean that he must go to any lengths to maintain the Corps’ prestige (Reiner, 1992). Nonetheless, this devotion conflicts with military orders that forbid such behavior, as well as the moral precepts of justice and human rights.

Per a Kantian deontological viewpoint, Jessup clearly broke moral rules in his actions. According to Kant’s categorical imperative, people should behave in accordance with universally applicable principles and regard other people as ends in and of themselves rather than as merely means to an end (Higgins & Solomon, 2923). This idea directly contradicts Jessup’s readiness to risk Santiago’s welfare to maintain military discipline. To avoid the morally reprehensible aspects of his decision-making, Jessup ought to have acknowledged Private Santiago’s rights rather than using him as a pawn to uphold unit discipline. Rather than regarding Private Santiago as a means to an end, he ought to have followed the categorical imperative and treated him as an end in and of himself.

Jessup’s dilemma can also be resolved through utilitarianism. Utilitarianism seeks to maximize utility, or general happiness, by evaluating the morality of actions in light of their effects (Scarre, 2020). It is necessary to establish that Jessup’s actions are unethical from a utilitarian perspective: the damage Santiago suffered—resulting in his death—outweighs any possible benefits in maintaining order. Because Jessup’s actions cause a net loss of happiness, utilitarian calculus cannot justify his choices. Jessup needed to acknowledge the ramifications of his behavior and seek alternative strategies for upholding discipline that did not cause such serious harm to a single person.

From a leadership standpoint, incorporating Dion’s methods underscores the importance of moral leadership in solving problems in hierarchical organizations. Sincerity, integrity, and accountability are components of ethical leadership, and Jessup evidently lacked these traits that would have allowed him to resolve his situation more skillfully (Dion, 2021). The crisis of leadership is a notable theme in the film—integrating a culture of ethical leadership within the ranks could allow leaders like Jessup to make choices that respect moral standards and preserve order. To resolve disputes within the unit, Jessup might have used conflict-resolution strategies. Had mediation taken place, circumstances such as those involving Private Santiago might not have escalated to the point where punitive actions were necessary.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that Colonel Jessup’s actions violate fundamental moral principles when viewed through the lenses of Kantian deontology, utilitarianism, and ethical leadership. The moral predicament in A Few Good Men provides an engaging story that requires Jessup to weigh moral principles against institutional loyalty. Leaders can, however, handle similar situations more skillfully if they take into account individual rights and moral integrity.

References

Dion, M. (2021). Worldviews, ethics and organizational life. (n.d.). Springer.

Higgins, K., & Solomon, R. (2023). The age of German idealism. Taylor & Francis.

Reiner, R. (1992). A few good men [Film]. Castle Rock Entertainment.

Scarre, G. (2020). Utilitarianism. Routledge.

Cite this paper

Select style

Reference

StudyCorgi. (2026, May 26). Ethical Analysis of Colonel Jessup’s Behavior in “A Few Good Men”. https://studycorgi.com/ethical-analysis-of-colonel-jessups-behavior-in-a-few-good-men/

Work Cited

"Ethical Analysis of Colonel Jessup’s Behavior in “A Few Good Men”." StudyCorgi, 26 May 2026, studycorgi.com/ethical-analysis-of-colonel-jessups-behavior-in-a-few-good-men/.

* Hyperlink the URL after pasting it to your document

References

StudyCorgi. (2026) 'Ethical Analysis of Colonel Jessup’s Behavior in “A Few Good Men”'. 26 May.

1. StudyCorgi. "Ethical Analysis of Colonel Jessup’s Behavior in “A Few Good Men”." May 26, 2026. https://studycorgi.com/ethical-analysis-of-colonel-jessups-behavior-in-a-few-good-men/.


Bibliography


StudyCorgi. "Ethical Analysis of Colonel Jessup’s Behavior in “A Few Good Men”." May 26, 2026. https://studycorgi.com/ethical-analysis-of-colonel-jessups-behavior-in-a-few-good-men/.

References

StudyCorgi. 2026. "Ethical Analysis of Colonel Jessup’s Behavior in “A Few Good Men”." May 26, 2026. https://studycorgi.com/ethical-analysis-of-colonel-jessups-behavior-in-a-few-good-men/.

This paper, “Ethical Analysis of Colonel Jessup’s Behavior in “A Few Good Men””, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal. Please use the “Donate your paper” form to submit an essay.