Explain why the mere existence of a command might not necessarily imply that you are obligated to obey it. Give an example.
The existence of a command does not always imply that you are obligated to obey it because the obligation to obey depends on various factors such as the legitimacy of the command, moral considerations, personal values, and the context surrounding the command.
For instance, consider a scenario where a superior officer in the military issues a command to a soldier to engage in an act that is contrary to the soldier's moral principles, such as intentionally harming innocent civilians. Despite the existence of the command, the soldier may choose not to obey it because they recognize the moral obligation to protect innocent lives and prevent harm. In this case, the soldier's personal values and moral framework override the obligation to follow the command, leading them to make an ethical decision against obedience.
Furthermore, the legitimacy of the command also plays a crucial role in determining the obligation to obey it. If a command is issued by someone who lacks the authority to demand compliance or if it contradicts established laws, regulations, or principles, individuals may not be obligated to obey it. For instance, if a manager at a company makes a command that goes against the company's policies or employment laws, employees may choose to disregard the command as it lacks legitimacy.
Overall, the mere existence of a command does not create an automatic obligation to obey it. Factors such as personal values, moral considerations, and the legitimacy of the command come into play, and individuals evaluate these factors to determine whether or not they should comply with the command.