Tony Stark Seriously Should Have Died: But He Didn’t
Tony Stark was not born on a planet twenty-seven light years away. He was never bitten by a radioactive spider, enhanced to become a Super-Soldier, or caught in the path of a stray gamma ray. The transition from man to superhero was by choice, not chance. Iron Man was bred from a series of decisions that challenged every pre-conceived notion about Tony Stark. His ascent from a man who focused only on self-interests to an almost altruistic vigilante can be defined by looking at his responses to a series of ethical dilemmas throughout the film Iron Man.
Despite some being for better or for worse, these choices shaped Tony Stark, the man, into Tony
Stark, the hero.
The change in Tony Stark’s
…show more content…
This was prompted after a journalist revealed to him that the city was being seized by weapons produced by Stark Industries, targeting all of its civilians. The ethical theory that supports this decision to intervene in Gulmira is consequentialism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines consequentialism and the judgement of right and wrong by stating that “whether an act is morally right depends only on the consequences of that act or of something related to that act, such as the motive behind the act or a general rule requiring acts of the same kind” (Consequentialism). Despite the risks involved in the situation, Tony Stark came out of Gulmira having achieved his goals. He was able to out- smart the use of civilian human shields and only attack the terrorists, as well as was able to destroy the Stark Industries weapons that were on site. Even though he had to take lives in order to complete his mission, more good was done than harm because the death of those few prevented the death of many other innocent lives. By completing these two goals successfully,
Stark’s decision to intervene in Gulmira was righteous.
The decisions that he made throughout the film Iron Man outlined the development