The film "High Noon" shows interesting comparisons with Kant's philosophy and views. Although many people say that they can reflect the views of the philosopher, especially through the actions of leading Kane, this study analyzes the interesting and somewhat contradictory view of Kane's wife's actions.
It is important to note first that Kane's wife is an emotional person. He was a religious woman, a quaker, and she chose this lifestyle after seeing her father and brother killing her with weapons. His current position on weapons, violence and personal interference reflects the emotional side that Kant clearly says weak and is completely different from Kant's viewers.
Supports the fact that it focuses on the consequences of anticancer. You do not see the act of murder simply for your actions and defensive purposes. It deals too much with who dies and dies, and is not enough to risk their lives to carry out the plot. Kant would say that he does not see the obligation to act in the individual and focuses more on how and how this can lead to no matter how unpredictable.
On the contrary, it is important to note that Kane's wife is an analytic person. To some extent, he relies on his reasons to base his own opinion on life. Obviously, he does not believe in murder because he believes he believes morally bad, but he also analyzes the very human and mortal aspect of the killer. He admits the worthlessness of killing another man and the fact that he is breaking all his moral norms. We can say that he only works in the teachings of God, but he accepted it in his own will and based his views on his personal experience. Kane's wife is not just another religious fanatic protesting self-assurance and deadly / civilized law. She is a woman who has great self-esteem and is able to pass on this respect to life in order to be aware of one thing: she can honestly and reasonably say that killing is wrong. It is on a strong moral basis.
By the end of the film, however, Kane's wife shows a dramatic turn to Kant's philosophy. He is able to change his mind about worry and future analysis, and he is aware of the obligation to protect the protection of his husband. She is willing to break her views after killing to rescue her husband, though she does not end her morality. What he does is justified and a logical, moral act that Kant would support for the simple fact of following the ethics of duty.
It is clear that Kane's wife's character is dynamic. It is ethical and fair throughout the film, but how it determines it, or how its actions are what is changing. Although he does not lose his emotions to complete the actions, he is able to put them in a sense and not disturb them. Kane's wife has always been subject to the rules of ethics of duty, but in the end it was a definitive, decisive act to really allow her to express what she knew and knew.
Source by sbobet