The concept of the categorical imperative is a syllogism

In the movie “Gone Baby Gone,” the main character, Patrick, faces a moral dilemma when he finds the missing child, Amanda. He has to decide whether to follow the orders of the child’s drug-addicted mother and return the child to her or report the kidnapping to the police. Applying Kant’s moral philosophy, the final decision made by Patrick is judged based on his actions in relation to the three premises of Kant’s categorical imperative and Michael Sandel’s three contrasts.

According to Kant’s first premise, Patrick behaves morally because he returns the victim he was hired to find, and without condition, this is the “right” conduct for any detective in cases of kidnapping. As a detective, Patrick’s duty is to locate the missing child and return her to her parents, regardless of the personal feelings and circumstances involved. Patrick would have made a mistake if he had returned Amanda to her mother. This would not be what other detectives would do in a similar situation.

The second premise of Kant’s categorical imperative suggests that Patrick acted morally because he respected the dignity of Amanda and treated her as an end in herself, not as a means to an end like everyone else in the film. Unlike Amanda’s biological mother, who treated her daughter as a commodity to be traded for drugs, Patrick’s actions were focused on the well-being of the child. Patrick put her well-being and safety above the wishes of others.

Finally, Kant’s third premise suggests that Patrick acted morally because he acted as if his conduct was establishing a universal law governing others in similar circumstances. By reporting the kidnapping to the police, Patrick’s action established a moral law that should govern all detectives in similar situations. In his actions, Patrick ensured the safety of the child and that of its biological mother was put first.

In addition to Kant’s categorical imperative, Michael Sandel’s three contrasts provide a framework for evaluating Patrick’s decision. The first comparison is between consequentialist and Deontological reasoning. The first contrast is between consequentialist and deontological thinking. Consequentialists base their reasoning on the result of an act, while deontological people are based upon duty and responsibility. In this case, Patrick’s actions were based on his duty as a detective to locate the missing child and ensure her safety. Patrick did not place the importance of consequences on his decision, but the morality behind it.

Second, there is a distinction made between personal choice and moral duty. Patrick’s decision was not based on personal preference but on his moral obligation to act in the best interests of the child. He was not influenced in his decision by knowing the biological mother or that she was a heroin addict. He focused instead on the duty he had as a detective, which was to find and return the child.

Third contrast: the difference between right and good. Kant’s categorical imperative suggests that an action can be morally right even if it does not lead to a desirable outcome. Patrick’s decision to report the kidnapping to the police was the right thing to do, even if it did not lead to a desirable outcome for Amanda’s biological mother.

In conclusion, applying Kant’s moral philosophy and Michael Sandel’s three contrasts to Patrick’s decision in the movie “Gone Baby Gone,” it is evident that he acted morally by reporting the kidnapping to the police. He acted on the basis of his duties as a detective, to find and return the missing children. His priorities were the welfare of the child and not the wishes of others. The decision he made established a rule of morality that all detectives should follow in situations like this, to ensure that the safety and wellbeing of the child is always the highest priority.