Wayne Stewart, author of a thesis and a website of the same name (Metaphysics by Default), discusses a philosophical question about personal identity and the meaning of life. This is worth considering as we “regard the pain of others” as we go about creating visual communication.
As Stewart says in Chapter 8: “Everyone maintains personal identity; it persists irrespective of our individual traits. Personal identity is the ‘common denominator’ of soul: where personal identity persists, a soul will surely be found.”
To the extent that we visual communicators “take” the images of others or “take” their ideas (even if voluntarily provided to us as creators of all things visual), we must be thoughtful about how we “use” the images and ideas of others. Why? Because we are dealing with the personal identity of other human beings. So we have basic ethical obligations to be fair and accurate in creations that involve taking the images and ideas of others for our creations.
How can one think about this responsibility? Wayne Stewart provides some thoughtful ideas in Chapter 8 of his online discussion of metaphysics: To read that chapter, click here: Chapter 8
I in respect to this understand what Stewart and you Dr Dykers are saying about ethical obligations and keeping the ideas of others fair and accurate, and keeping the feelings of others safe. Dealing with personal slander myself I have coped with this and know what it is like to have my name slandered and wouldn’t want any other’s to be hurt in the making of our project. On the other hand I am torn by the obligations and sanctions given by our country. Everyone by the first amendment does there by have the right to say whatever they want and that was the point we were trying to get by in the video. I understand we do not want to start anything and hurt certain people’s feelings but certainly out there somewhere we have skipped something and someone will be hurt. We cannot simply censor everything for then the project would be censored itself. I am simply torn between ethical values and the values my country has laid before me. I think everyone should have a right to say what they want but on the other hand knowing what has happened in the past, I don’t want to see anyone getting hurt, so again, i’m torn.
It is easy to say that a photo or footage should be shown objectively without regard for the reaction from the audience. This must be difficult; first there is the delima of the photographer or reporter to be true their own beliefs or standards; second there is the beliefes and standards of the viewer; third there is the law. In Comm 105 my final project was to interview a art professor at Salem. During the interview I learned of an incident when during an exibition a student choose abortion as the subject of his or her artwork. A visitor of the exhibition was offended and spoke to the professor. The professor responded this is the concern of this student and because of free speech the student has the right to speak on his or her views whether or not it fits with your beliefs or not. During the political campaigns this year I’m sure you like me grew very tired of the political ads. A friend of mine said, “they should be limited as to what they can say in these ads” I responded, “the same laws that give us the right to vote for whomever we want protects their rights to say whatever they want”. In a visual setting it is much more difficult because interpretation is a vital role in the photo or footage but in my opinion if we choose walk ethically then we report what we see or hear while protecting the innocent.