Tyrant Utilitarianism In Tyrants

Tyrant. What do you think of when you hear tyrant? Ruler, cruel, dictator, and autocrat, come to mind. In “Tyrant” Dr. House and his team have a new patient admitted in their hospital. The patient is a powerful leader of an African nation. Among his people he has created an army of young, drunk soldiers that are commanded to do what he desires, which is a genocide. Based off the previous actions of the patient should Dr. House and his team treat the patient when looking through a deontologist and utilitarian viewpoint. In “Tyrant” Dr. Chase and Dr. Cameron are working to find a treatment for their patient, the tyrant who was experiencing a feeling of lassitude. While Chase is away from the patient a young African man comes up to him and tells a story to him how his patient has created an army that has kidnapped, raped, tortured, and killed his wife. The man goes on to tell Dr. Chase that his patient is going to kill all the “cockroaches” in the country. After listening
Relating to “Tyrant,” should the patient be treated? Deontology clashes with utilitarianism when the patient is being diagnosed for his mysterious illness. For this situation in “Tyrant” a deontologist would say the ethical action would be to treat the patient and not based your decision on what the patient has done or plans to do. It would not be ethical to refuse him treatment or treat him wrong on purpose. Flip the roles to a utilitarianism, and they would say the ethical action would be the action that benefits the greatest number. It would be ethical to not treat the patient for the civilians of his country can be free of the genocide. It would not be ethical to treat him because it only benefits the patient rather than benefitting his country peoples. In “Tyrant” you can see how the two theories clashed when Dr. Chase and Dr. Cameron are deciding to treat the patient or