Breaking Bad and its Philosophical Context - Part 1
I do not watch much television. Most programming these days is just that: sheep herding - the same philosophical ideologies of altruism, amoralism, nihilism, etc. put into moving pictures - alas, regrettably so.
Breaking Bad is decidedly different.
The show’s basic question of “What if you had terminal lung cancer and knew how to cook the best meth anyone had ever tried, to provide for your family?” merely scratches the surface of the ethical questions it raises.
Morality is within the realm of ethics - and ethics, in turn, is a branch of philosophy. The primary reason I think Breaking Bad is excellent is that it is a fantastic study of morality in a social context. Thus, it also serves as an excellent portrayal of various philosophical ideologies - all ideas, after all, eventually find their sources in philosophy.
Breaking Bad begins with the brilliant chemist turned teacher/family man Walter White finding out that he has stage 3 lung cancer. With the realization that he may not have much longer to live, he looks for a way to ensure his family’s well-being after his death - understanding that his family’s future lives depend on this decision. He finds his solution in the production of methamphetamine. For the first two seasons, he hides this from his immediate family, from his DEA-agent brother in law Hank, etc. He understands (or learns with experience) that his decision to sell meth puts him in grave danger with the feds, with other meth dealers, and ultimately bears the risk of failure and death (even before the cancer gets to him). He deals with these risks systematically, rationally, and swiftly. He learns, he strives forward. With every step, he gets closer to his goal - sometimes having to take one step forward and two steps back, before finally getting what he’s after. Eventually, he succeeds.
Does Walter White make mistakes along the way? Certainly. Are his actions moral? Fundamentally, I posit that they are. According to the society in which he lives: No. This is the dilemma that is core to the philosophical context of Breaking Bad and the one I’d like to explore further in this essay. Walter White’s actions are the result of a rational decision to provide a product to people whom have voluntarily decided to consume it - to their own detriment notwithstanding - to make a profit to be used for his family’s livelihood. Walter White cannot do what he does without taking tremendous risks - imposed wholly by the societal context in which he finds himself.
This concludes Part 1. I welcome comments. As always, please keep it civil.
