But what is unethical, and what is not? What is politically incorrect, and what is correct?
Seems legit. |
Thankfully, guest lecturer Dr John Harrison was there to set us on the right path! With a series of photos and videos, we were shown a sample of questionable ads.
My mainstream journalist job prospects have shrunk rapidly, because I found a fair few of those images and videos to be absolutely hilarious!
I can't help it. Being politically incorrect goes hand in hand with my sarcasm, moderate cynicism and irreverence. I also read Cracked every day. Yes, you may judge me.
Anyway. I was very interested to discover that ethics isn't just based on public perception of right and wrong. While the theory of Consequentialism revolves around majority rule and 'the end justifies the means', the theories of Deontology and Virtue are vastly different.
Deontology (if I remember correctly) actually lists the rules and requirements of being ethical. However, the problem with this system is that the list of rules might not be your own personal values. What you consider to be wrong, the writers might think right, and vice-versa.
Virtue ethics seem to be the most 'realistic' set, as they are based around universal good habits or dispositions of character. These dispositions include courage, justice, temperance, prudence, and other nice-sounding words.
To me, it seems that consequentialism is the least effective set of ethics, as it is based on the opinions and values of the majority of people, rather than an established, unchangable system. In other words, something that really isn't ethical might be considered normal. You know, like this:
Put your back into it! |
Food for thought, boys and girls!
No comments:
Post a Comment