All My Sons: Ethical Choices

In reading All My Sons, one may discover many ethical choices that are involved throughout the plot of the play. Joseph Keller talks throughout the entire play about how his whole life has been devoted to setting up his only living son, Chris, for his own successful life. Right after Joe tells his son Chris that it was his fault, not his business partners, that cost the twenty or so men their lives, Joe says, "You're a boy, what could I do! I'm in business, a man is in business; a hundred and twenty cracked, you're out of business..." (69). He then goes on to tell Chris, "Chris... Chris, I did it for you, it was a chance and I took it for you" (70). This shows the Joe Keller cared more about the wellbeing of his family and the pride of his company than the the twenty soldiers who were killed due to the faulty cylinders. If he believed the needs of society were more important than the needs of his family, one can assume that he would either have cut his losses and not have shipped the broken cylinders, or at least have realized how bad of a thing he had done and take at least some partial blame for it, because his business partner might not have been 100 percent innocent. Chris on the other hand believes the needs of society are more important than the needs of family. This can be proven in a dialogue between Joe and his wife, Kate, where they are talking about Chris, who has stormed off in a fit of rage and disbelief.

Kate:Joe, Joe... it don't excuse it that you did it for the family.
Joe: It's got to excuse it!
Kate:There's something bigger to the family to him.
Joe: Nothin' is bigger!
Kate: There is to him. (77).
This shows that Kate knows that Chris believes the needs of society are more important than the needs of his family, and that Joe is ignorant of his belief, and also that Joe continues to contradict Chris in believing that nothing is bigger than the needs of a family.

I believe that in most instances, the needs of society are more important than the needs of society, but there are still a few exceptions. The needs of society should be more important than the needs of your family when something you are doing is affecting society in a bad or hurtful way. Consider an event such as the Enron scandal. Basically the heads of the company were involved in accounting fraud, which caused many shareholders and employees to lose most of their life savings in mere days. If the leaders of this business weren't so focused on gaining as much money as possible for their families, they probably wouldn't have been involved in such acts, and would have probably helped out society, but what they were doing was actually extremely hampering society by having so many people lose so much money. In contrast, I also believe that family needs may trump society's needs in very small circumstances. If what you are doing has minute to no effect on any part of society whatsoever, which rarely happens, it is okay to choose your family, because when it comes down to it, life's tough.