In the fleet, there are many times when officers need to make difficult decisions: decisions that have large consequences. Sometimes, it seems easier to solve the problem by making the wrong decision because the immediate consequences can be a burden. However, it is important for officers to make the correct decisions, even if they have consequences. One situation that comes up often in the fleet is the opportunity to “gun-deck,” which means signing off on something that has not been finished or inspected. Since officers are the leaders in the military, they are the ones most often put in the position to gun-deck. Using moral theories learned in class, this paper will analyze the situation of gun-decking so the officer can come to the correct decision even if it will negatively affect them. To help me understand the situation presented, I had a conversation with my company officer, LT Amanda Kinsel. She is a Surface Warfare Officer and said that these situations come up in the fleet all the time. When an officer is asked to sign off on a planned maintenance task, loyalty to the mission, your chiefs, and your personal integrity are at stake. She stressed to not let a situation get far enough to where tasks need to be …show more content…
In most cases, the officer’s pride becomes more important than the mission. They want to avoid problems and penalties and keep everything in their division running smoothly. It is human nature to avoid consequences and do what is easiest at the time. In this case, the officer would have an excess of pride. It is important for officers to not have an extreme lack or excess amount of any virtues. This idea is referring to Aristotle’s golden mean theory. When considering all virtues, it is okay to have some excess and some deficiency because the average would land in the middle. Gun-decking still occurs because officers are not thinking about the right