On Character and Creativity: Philosophical Reflections on Moral Education in the United States Military Harry H. Jones IV Memphis, Tennessee M.A., University of Virginia, 2010 B.S., United States Military Academy, 1998 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty Of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy University of Virginia May 2016 © Copyright by Harry Howard Jones IV All Rights Reserved May 2016 For Laura, Haddie, Harrison, Gresham, Mary Goodwin, and Kate iv Abstract My dissertation seeks to bring recent work in ethics and creativity to bear in new and interesting ways on the Army’s moral education efforts. The U.S. Army aims to develop leaders who can exercise excellent moral judgment, often in extreme situations, and who have the ability to solve new, complex problems as well as old problems in innovative ways. One question I aim to answer is, “How might the U.S. Army develop leaders who are deeply moral and exceptionally creative?” In order to do that well, the Army needs substantive conceptions of both character and creativity. I argue for a conception of character that places emphasis on the skill-like nature of virtue and, subsequently, a conception of creativity as, itself, a skill. The exercise of a skill is sensitive to a variety of external factors present in any given situation. The exercise of virtue is sensitive to situational factors as well, but moral education in the Army gives insufficient attention to this. While character development is about much more than merely about doing the “right thing,” one important aim is to equip agents to exercise good judgment. In the context of moral education, I argue that deliberate attention to situational factors (including institutional structures) will help agents make better decisions, even while adding complexity to the problem. As moral agents develop, practical wisdom enables them to exercise the virtues in new, unfamiliar, and often ambiguous situations. In this way, the exercise of practical wisdom is itself a creative act, and yet creativity is not typically emphasized in moral education. I argue that teaching creativity as an integral part of moral education will better equip agents (i.e. military personnel) to exercise practical wisdom in an increasingly complex world. v Table of Contents Acknowledgements vi Introduction vii Chapter 1: Character Talk and Moral Education in the Military 1 1.0 Introduction 3 1.1 Contemporary Virtue Ethics 6 1.2 The Alleged Challenge of Situationism 25 1.3 Creativity and Virtue 36 1.4 Virtue Ethics for the U.S. Army 47 Chapter 2: Is Moral Education Compatible With Creativity? 60 2.0 Introduction 62 2.1 What is Plato’s Educational Project? 64 2.2 A Reply to Annas 68 2.3 Plato’s Education and Creativity? 79 2.4 Obedience and Conformity in the U.S. Military? 87 2.5 Obedience, Moral Courage, and Misplaced Loyalty 98 Chapter 3: Can the Military Have Leaders Who Are Both Ethical and Creative? 114 3.0 Introduction 116 3.1 On Lying 118 3.2 The Prevalence of Lying 123 3.3 Lying and Character 134 3.4 Lying, Narratives, and Reframing 145 3.5 Is Untruthfulness the Real Problem? 157 Chapter 4: Curiosity, Creativity, and Moral Development for West Point’s Character Development Program 164 4.0 Introduction 166 4.1 Lying and Exceptions 167 4.2 Creativity, Dishonesty, and Leadership 180 4.3 Developing Character as Skill 197 4.4 Creativity and Ethics 213 Bibliography 222 vi Acknowledgements This work would not have been possible without the financial support of the United States Army and, in particular, the United States Military Academy. As a career Army Officer, the Army has been good to me in many ways, and for that I am grateful. I would like to express my sincere thanks to my committee: Loren Lomasky, Sahar Akhtar, Jim Cargile, and Andy Wicks. Their time, attention, and feedback throughout the dissertation writing process was crucial to completing the project in a timely manner. I am forever grateful to the late Louis Pojman. His 1995 lecture, “What is Philosophy?” sparked my interest in the discipline and set me on a path through the Army that I could never have anticipated. I am grateful to the many instructors I have had over the years, but I especially want to acknowledge my first philosophy instructor, Jeff Wilson. His passion for the material and care for his students continues to inspire me. Of course, I could not have sustained this project without the encouragement and patience of my wife, Laura. Our five kids provided support in their own way, including daily comic relief. West Point, NY April 2016 vii Introduction1 The Army, and especially West Point, has for nearly two centuries been concerned with maintaining high ethical standards of conduct across the organization and developing “leader[s] of character”2 who exemplify virtuous behavior across a wide variety of situations. Despite these commitments, one need not look far to find military leaders, even some at the most senior levels, who seem to have lost their way morally.3 The Army is in a continuous search for ways to address ethical failings and is heavily invested in moral education as a central mission. My overall aim is to aid the Army in its search for way to better its moral education efforts. In order to do this, I will first argue that the Army’s very view of character is less robust and not as psychologically realistic as it could be. I take one’s conception of character to be central to any attempt at moral education. As such, a superficial view of character will limit the effectiveness of any programs built upon it. After making the case for this, I will offer a more fine-grained conception of character, highlight some problems currently pressing the Army on the moral front, and finally suggest some steps the Army might take to begin addressing moral education in a more realistic 1 The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy position of the United States Military Academy, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the US Government. 2 The full text of the USMA mission is: “The United States Military Academy's mission is to educate, train and inspire the Corps of Cadets so that each graduate is a commissioned leader of character committed to the values of Duty, Honor, Country and prepared for a career of professional excellence and service to the nation as an officer in the United States Army.” See www.westpoint.edu 3 General (Retired) David Petraeus is probably the most prominent recent controversy. Leave aside whether or not anyone should care about his moral failing. For my purposes, it is sufficient to note that the military cares about whether or not its senior leaders commit adultery (or fraud, sexual harassment, and so forth). viii way. I hope the following questions will help clarify the overall arc of the dissertation as I see it: • Chapter 1: What theoretical framework for virtue and creativity is in play here? • Chapter 2: Given that soldiers are trained to follow orders and conform in a wide variety of ways, why should we expect anyone in the military to be creative? • Chapter 3: How would your proposal handle a real problem such as widespread dishonesty in the Army? • Chapter 4: How would your proposal change the way the military conducts moral education? The (very) short answers to the above questions are as fallows: • Chapter 1: The conception of character I develop that relies heavily on the notion of “skill” and takes seriously external factors when thinking about exercising the virtues. The conception of creativity follows similar contours. • Chapter 2: Rote learning and high levels of conformity early in the education process are not antithetical to independent thinking later in life. • Chapter 3: It would recognize that the alleged dishonesty problem has little to do with character and a great deal to do with institutional structures and and perverse incentives. As such, efforts to curb “dishonesty” would be aimed primarily at changing systems. • Chapter 4: Moral education efforts would reflect a greater sensitivity to the power of external factors, and they would foster creativity as an integral part the overall program. Overall, I intend to examine and constructively critique the Army’s conception of character and moral education, drawing upon contemporary virtue ethics, moral psychology, and the best philosophical and empirical work on creativity. ix I should note that the U.S. Army is funding my project, and, for that, I am most grateful. With no undue pressure or coercion from the Army, I aim to make a substantive contribution to the ongoing discussion of morality in the military.4 This discussion is alive presently in the Army, and it has the attention of the Army’s senior leadership. As recently as July 2015, the Chief of Staff of the Army—the senior ranking general officer in the Army—along with the Secretary of the Army, gathered all the senior leaders of the Army for an ethics symposium to discuss matters with which I am concerned here.5 The Army is committed systematically to developing moral leaders who are capable of moral decision making under the most extreme conditions. However, there is clearly more work do be done toward this end. It is my overall aim to make a substantive contribution to this effort. 4 In other words, no one is making me write on this issue. The analysis and conclusions are my own, not shaped by any pressures from the institution or any person in the institutional Army.