As of the 21st century many ethical issues persistently face Natural Science, by placing ethical impositions on this field of natural science aren’t we indirectly placing ethical impositions on the natural world itself? Striking a balance between the continuing of research in all fields of natural science is necessary but doesn’t it contribute to the limiting of knowledge itself? What prefixed criterion does this lie under?
From frog dissections in high schools to something as big of an issue as animal testing, they have the tendency to take it to a level that the concept of ethics invariably gets drawn in. The brutal usage of animals done by major firms has become is becoming more common in today’s world. Where in complete contrast Art is used as a form of expression, it defies most ethical boundaries. Nude photography and use of animal parts as a part of an artistic piece of work are considered to be “wrong”. It is something that has been used to create awareness for these animals all over the world. When it comes to areas like Visual Arts the ethical judgments valid in biology or chemistry are not valid in this case, a real life example was an ongoing campaign run by PETA to support animals that are tortured and skinned alive for their fur by having celebrities pose in the nude. These campaigns have come as a shock to a larger part of the society especially in conservative countries like India. Could this be restricting the expression of Art through the medium of photography? When we look at the bigger picture is it that one individual’s exposed body that comes to be the point of focus or the statement the artist intended to make? Understanding the picture on a deeper level provides insight into the artist’s mind, for some this image is merely a means of entertainment but the people that do understand the notion behind it have more of an impact. Knowledge on these cases is getting expanded and conveyed to that part of the population, this is considered ethically wrong so the fact that some part of the people did gain something from this and it would benefit the environment and society as a whole does not hold any value? Isn’t staying fully clothed during photography causing hindrance in the artist’s work and therefore miscommunication to those that were to gain knowledge from this?
Similarly in the same field of expressionist art, Guillermo Habacuc Vargas a famous artist tied a malnourished street dog to a museum door with the sign "you are what you are reading" to convey the message to the entire population of the implications their actions have on such animals. For him it was an attempt to create an impression on majority of the population leaving behind an example for the future generations. Society in those regions objected towards this on the basis of ethics, the banning of this work of art that is supposed to be an objective for future generations deprives others of this opportunity to gain knowledge. This piece of work was not taken with the same intention that the artist intended it to be, Society has prefixed notions of what lies within the ethical category. What exactly is acceptable, posing in the nude to gain awareness for animals or to starve one dog to save lives of numerous others?
Stem cell research has caused an immense amount of progress in the field of regenerative medicine recently. With every medicinal procedure there are ethical limitations to consider, in this case the use of human embryos has been a cause of concern for most of the population. These advancements can often have a negative impact as well; BBC reports revealed that organs from healthy babies have been taken to illegally sell in the market possibly for stem cell research. The negative impact of this research caused raised such ethical issues worldwide, however can scientists be held responsible for the application of their innovation?
The question of whether the chicken came first or the egg is a perfectly epitomizes the relationship between ethical judgments and knowledge. What we need to ask ourselves is what the greater importance should be given to, to the production of knowledge or to adhere to ethics?
It is in fact Ethics and knowledge that affect each other, the very basis of this argument is to determine whether ethics control the amount of knowledge produced. Ultimately human beings create these terms and with every person that applies this ethical code to his/her situation the personal boundaries change, once again leaving it back to the ambiguity that it started with before. Peter Singer states that “the basic principle of equality does not require equal or identical treatment; it requires equal consideration.”
As variable as the interpretation of ethical judgments may be there is still a basis on which we evaluate our choices, segregate them from right and wrong, categorize them into black and white. When Art is studied in depth the ethical aspect of it never comes to mind initially, all great artists have a different mindset, each artist may have completely contrasting views on many aspects. The term ‘tortured artist’ has been used end number of times where there is this predefined list of expectations and pressure for being that much superior. This comes from experience and struggle, forms of Art like music and literature convey the individual’s innermost emotions and those with over complicated lives or restrictions by the society help in the enhancement of their work, ethical judgments act as a positive here. So when an artist or poet or writer is judged by the society or limited by what may be considered morally wrong it only makes the work that much stronger. Instead of saying what actions are good say what does it mean for an action to be good? Is there a fixed category for an action to be assessed as good? This is yet another human invented criterion, thus can we reconcile with good? Even if it means settling for ambiguity
Word count: 1355
References:
"Democratic Underground Forums." Democratic Underground Forums - Request Error. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3049666>.
"Emerging Ethical Dilemmas in Science and Technology." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, n.d. Web. 5 Jan. 2014. <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121217162440.htm>.
"Ethics." Theoryofknowledgenet. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Nov. 2013. <http://www.theoryofknowledge.net/areas-of-knowledge/ethics/>.
Nagel, Thomas. Letzte Fragen = Mortal Questions / Thomas Nagel. Hamburg : Europ. Verlagsanstalt: n.p., 2008. Print.
"The Babies Who Are Murdered to Order." Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 18 Dec. 2006. Web. 20 Nov. 2013. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-423057/The-babies-murdered-order.html>.
"Welcome to the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry." IUPAC. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Nov. 2013. <http://www.iupac.org/>.
"Why Animal Rights?" PETA Asia-Pacific. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <http://www.petaasiapacific.com/issues-animalrights.asp>.
[Type text][Type text][Type text]
"Ethics." Theoryofknowledgenet. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Nov. 2013. <http://www.theoryofknowledge.net/areas-of-knowledge/ethics/>.
"Welcome to the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry." IUPAC. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Nov. 2013. <http://www.iupac.org/>.
"Democratic Underground Forums." Democratic Underground Forums - Request Error. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3049666>.
"The Babies Who Are Murdered to Order." Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 18 Dec. 2006. Web. 20 Nov. 2013. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-423057/The-babies-murdered-order.html>.
"Why Animal Rights?" PETA Asia-Pacific. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <http://www.petaasiapacific.com/issues-animalrights.asp>.