Issue: The Lawrence Wilson Art Gallery is proposing an exhibition for the Perth International Art Festival. An artwork is being proposed that pushes ethical boundaries. This said artwork is ‘Helena’ by Marco Evaristti. Imagine you are a member of a UWA human or animal ethics committee and have to decide whether the artwork can be exhibited at UWA.
Description of the artwork: “‘Helena’ consists of ten Moulinex blenders positioned on an ordinary kitchen table; each blender is filled with water and houses a gold fish. The blenders are visibly connected to the mains as they are plugged in a multi-socket making the rules of the game implicitly set out from the start: anyone is allowed to press the ‘on’ button which will result in the liquidising
…show more content…
- Is the act of killing the fish going to ensue change and are the consequences able to be accepted when you kill the fish?
- Act of animal cruelty as the animal is unable to give consent for participation in this artwork.
- There is a level of uncertainty in whether pressing the button will indeed kill the fish or if the display is fake- this could lead to visitors pressing the button just to test whether the blenders do in fact work.
- Portrays a non- utilitarianism approach to justifying his point about the state of society and to an extent humanity.
- There is no mention of an age restriction for this artwork. Should certain age groups eg. Young children be allowed access to this aesthetic experience?
- “Legislation around Australia prohibits cruelty to animals. A typical definition of an act of cruelty is to ill-treat or unreasonably, unnecessarily or unjustifiably beat, kick, wound, mutilate, abuse, torture or terrify an animal. The emphasis is on preventing animals from suffering ‘unnecessary pain’.” (Arts Law, 2003). It could be said this artwork is unjustifiable due to lack of educational
This case study actually surprised me in some ways, because in the first chapter he compares what he believes is an “uncivilized behavior”, such as jumping a queue, or the withdraw of children late after school, donate money instead of wedding gifts, with very serious humanitarian problems as the one-child policy in China, the sale of organs, economic incentives for sterilization, trade in pollution permits, bets on the prospects of life and death of the elderly. I consider these examples very different and impossible to
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that states that an action is considered right as long as it promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. This theory was first proposed by Jeremy Bentham and later was refined by J.S Mill. Mill differs from Bentham by introducing a qualitative view on pleasure and makes a distinction between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. John Hospers critiques utilitarianism and shows that rule utilitarianism under more specific and stricter rules would promote utility better. Bernard Williams believes that utilitarianism is too demanding from people and instead believes virtue ethics is a better solution. Williams seems to have only considered act utilitarianism instead of rule utilitarianism, which may have better responses to the problems proposed by Williams. Sterling Hardwood purposes eleven objections to utilitarianism which can be used to help make compromise between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. I will argue that rule utilitarianism can be formed in such a way that it avoids the problems that arise from Williams, and Hardwood.
John Stuart Mill believes in a utilitarian society where people are seen as “things.” Moreover, in utilitarianism the focus of the goal is “forward-looking”, in looking at the consequences but not the ini...
Jeremy Bentham, one of the founders of Utilitarianism, believed his philosophy could provide for the “greatest happiness of the greatest number of people”. However benign it may sound, at the heart of Utilitarianism is a cold, teleological process which reduces happiness to a mere commodity. It is even worse that Saul Alinsky would extend this philosophy to a point where the truth becomes relative, justice becomes a tool of those powerful enough to wield it, and any means are justified to reach one’s desired ends.
...ry. Some may reject it and have the objection that utilitarianism does not provide an effective way of life. Those who object may say that this moral theory is not good or specific enough, lacks a mention of full human potential and capabilities, and fails to address the special moral values of humans. Mill provides an effective response to those who doubt utilitarianism, and states that there is only one end (happiness) that humans aim for and that humans and humans alone are the only ones who can judge and experience all pleasures and qualities of life.
“Animal Entertainment” refers to any animals used to act, perform, or fight for the enjoyment of humans. zoos, circuses, and bullfighting are all examples of animals used for entertainment. While many applaud these firms for putting on a spectacular show, many others argue that the animals are treated unfair. All of these animals are taken out of their natural environment and forced to perform acts not typically in their behavioral range. If one pays close attention at the circus, for example, it is visible how these animals are treated. Trainers threaten tigers with a whip and often hit elephants with metal on their legs. These techniques are inhumane and best explain why animals should not be used for entertainment. The use of animals for entertainment is a form of animal abuse because of the way the
Utilitarianism aims to perfect society by correcting traits that separate those in society and create conflict. Dr. Haber looks to perfect the human race by riding the world of race, disabilities, and disease; however, he does not take into account the implications of changing reality. The exclusion of Miss Lelache in the new reality proves to be a consequence of removing race, “That’s why she’s not here, he thought. She [Miss Lelache] could not have been born gray. Her color, her color of brown, was an essential part of her, not an accident. Her anger, timidity, brashness, gentleness, all were elements of her mixed being…She could not exist in the gray people’s world. She had not been born” (Le Guin 113). Dr. Haber removes personality defining aspects of individual people that conflict with society’s standards, which results in ostracizing the individuals from reality. Laurence Davis describes the effectiveness of a demanding society that operates by disregarding the individual, “A society may demand sacrifice of the individual and similarly a moment of contingency may be unavoidable. Things get in the way of the best laid plans. But a society that compels individual action based on the optimal functioning of society is in Le Guin’s organic terms, unhealthy” (Davis 173). Excluding those who represent the “Other” creates a slippery slope that allows
Mill, J. S., Bentham, J., & Ryan, A. (1987). Utilitarianism and other essays. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.
For instance, lawyers may find the article to bring up interesting points about art and lead to discussions about censorship and art or what makes injurious performance art different from injuries sustained in sports. Artists, on the other hand, may be disappointed because the article does not offer a clear answer if injurious performances, even fully consensual, is legal. Then there is the perspective of individuals who witness injurious performance art. Some individuals against this form of art may be disappointed that the article does not outright decry public forms of injurious art because they consider the performance disturbing and should be banned. A few individuals may be disappointed that there is no clear cut answer to legality in injurious performances. What this article does well is presenting multiple sides to the argument and using materials from various
Holmes offers three criticisms of utilitarianism. How is one going to achieve it so that it does benefit the highest number of people? How do you decide how to distribute the benefits in the best possible way? I agree that it would be very hard to decide the best way to distribute the benefits equally. How would a person decide if you do it over time or all at once? Utilitarianism sounds like a good way to live, as there are times it is necessary to safe the individuals t...
Seeing maimed animals are not pleasant images. Those images sometimes appear across computer and television screens. The advocacy groups who place these images in the public’s view are trying to jolt people into the realization that abuse exists. For every ten seconds that goes by an animal is getting abused (“Animal… Statistics”). One statistic states that “71% of pet-owning women entering women’s shelters reported that their batterer had injured, maimed, killed or threatened family pets for revenge or to psychologically control victims; 32% reported their children had hurt or killed animals” (“Animal… Violence”). Animal cruelty comes in several forms, some of which people do not know. There is animal experimenting, animal abuse, and mistreatment of animals. and through revealing the results from research, one discovers the horrific effects of animal abuse.
...terests of all who could be affected by the course our actions. Obviously, as human beings we can never consider all possible choices, calculate and compare consequences quantitatively, and be without bias. Your obligation is to do the best you can, while considering as many choices as possible. One could argue that, amidst the capitalist climate of our current world, utilitarianism calls upon us to look beyond the self for the greater good. Wouldn't it be admirable if all governments could follow this maxim? To conclude on the same point at Mills, “Whether it is so or not, must now be left to the consideration of the thoughtful reader”.
Based on this creator-centric definition, one may claim that art is purely a form of individual expression, and therefore creation of art should not be hindered by ethical consideration. Tattoos as pieces of artwork offer a great example of this issue. However, one may take it from the viewer’s perspective and claim that because art heavily involves emotion and the response of a community after viewing it, the message behind what is being presented is what should actually be judged. To what extent do ethical judgements limit the way the arts are created?... ...
...nizes the fish because, just like the fish, people fight daily battles to survive in life. This humanization of the fish enables the speaker to relate and respect him, and therefore, ultimately leads to his release.
Animal abuse is the suffering or harm of an animal other than for self-defense or for survival, such as for food, research, clothes, etc. Even in these situations, pain should be minimized to prevent suffering. This act has been going on since humans first interacted with animals. Even now millions of animals suffer and die because of human cruelty and unnecessary needs.