Kant's moral philosophy

Sleepers in the Context Of Kant's Moral Philosophy

Barry Levinson's 1996 motion picture Sleepers provides viewers with a shocking (and intriguing at the same time) account involving a group of boys who perform a horrible crime as a result of wanting to prank someone and end up in a juvenile center where they are subjected to a series of brutal abuses. The scene when the boys accidentally kill a person as they want to prank the hot dog vendor is especially interesting. Looking at matters from a perspective involving Kant's moral philosophy, it would seem that it is wrong to judge the boys solely based on how they murder an innocent human being.

When considering Kant's moral philosophy, it seems that the boys have a complex understanding of the situation they are in and of the role they need to play in this respective situation. Kant's Categorical Imperative theory perfectly applies in the case of the boys and of Father Bobby Carillo. Father Bobby's action is especially impressive when taking into account that he is well-acquainted with the nature of his actions and yet decides to go through with the plan of lying on the stand. The man practically weighs the factors involved in the trial and realizes that John and Tommy are going to be convicted for murdering a person who was guilty of having abused them. The fact that Nokes was responsible for traumatizing the boys and could simply walk away unpunished if it were not for Tommy and John acting played an important role in shaping the priest's thinking. To a certain degree, Kant's Categorical Imperative dictates that it was the Father's duty to act as he did in this situation. The Father's action can be interpreted in the context of an universal law -- one in which individuals would not be allowed to abuse children and in case that they do they would be provided with harsh punishments for their actions.

1. The boys obviously regret the fact that they take the hot dog stand to a subway station in their attempt to escape. Most people in similar circumstances would have put across similar behavior, as they tried to hold the stand for as long as they possibly could. They were determined to prevent it from falling and they probably acknowledged the delicate position they were in. The fact that they considered the harm they could do to an innocent bystander by dropping the stand or the fact that they did not necessarily want to harm the hot dog vendor business as a whole are visible in the moment when the stand goes down the stairs. The children are desperately trying to hold on to it even if they know that this means they could get caught. They are no longer interested in their personal well-being or in trying to get the hot dogs inside the cart, as all they want is to prevent a disaster from happening.

2. Reasons intervenes as the boys realize that they absolutely have to stop the cart from falling down the stairs. The boys start to treat others as ends in themselves as they first consider the financial damage associated with destroying the cart and as they rapidly realize that they are about to endanger someone's life. They are no longer thinking of people as means to an end, as they practically struggle to use all of their resources to address people's well-being.