Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of art & effects on society
Morality and ethical decisions
Importance of art and its impact on society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of art & effects on society
Interpreted literally, ethical judgements do seem to limit methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and the natural sciences; it’s not difficult to imagine the chaos of a world void of any kind of ethical considerations. However, can knowledge in the natural sciences even be compared to knowledge in the arts? Knowledge in the natural sciences includes knowledge that helps improve methods used in hospitals to treat previously untreatable illnesses. Art at first glance does not hold enough weight to be compared because it reaches a smaller number of people giving it less importance than knowledge gained in natural sciences. Nevertheless, art might not reach many people at one time, but it does spread ideas and judgements …show more content…
Does the artist hold any ethical responsibility or do these start with the interpretation of the observer? If artists are criticised or even censored in places, how can this be freedom of speech? Freedom of speech should not limit the methods used in the production of ideas. Some artistic methods have surfaced which offended people. People have started killing animals for art in order to make people aware of how much harm we do to our environment with the use of different chemicals. Artists wanted to show how we are gradually destroying our world through the immoral actions people try to avoid. Kant would not agree with the artists as its action is not ethical, but utilitarianism could eventually agree with these methods, because observers do react to the artistic pieces and that makes them aware of what we do. The reaction comes from the idea and if these are exposed to the world, they eventually will spread. These ideas can vary from one educational field to another, not restricting itself to one particular field like the natural sciences. All knowledge obtained from the arts then raises more questions, which in return makes it harder to solve and thus people will dig into more unethical ideas. The questions that I am dealing with is; do we people start being aware of what we all do and consciously change our habits because of the idea, or do we judge the artist for doing something so unethical and turn our heads? Does art even have to have some kind of purpose or is it being art alone purpose enough? Can an art that is not ethically based have a bigger reaction and consequently higher value? If an art piece makes people react, can we classify all these kind of methods as unethical? Yolanda
In Gaut’s essay, “The Ethical Criticism of Art”, he addresses the relevance of an art piece’s ethical value when making an aesthetic evaluation. His key argument revolves around the attitudes that works of art manifest such that he presents the following summary “If a work manifests ethically reprehensible attitudes, it is to that extent aesthetically defective, and if a work manifests ethically commendable attitudes, it is to that extent aesthetically meritorious”. In direct contrast with formalists, who divine a work’s merit through an assessment of its style and compositional aspects, Gaut states that any art piece’s value requires a pro tanto judgement. This pro tanto position allows for pieces considered stylistic masterpieces, to be
Mitchell, Helen Buss. "Aesthetic Experience." Roots of Wisdom: A Tapestry of Philosophical Traditions. 6th ed. Boston: Wadsworth, 2011. 303-24. Print.
A famous thought experiment in quantum physics is that of Schrödinger’s cat. In this experiment, a cat is placed in a box with poison that has a chance to either explode, killing the cat, or not explode, allowing the kitty to live. Although some would object, we ought to open the box to see if the cat is alive or not. Similarly, we should attempt to uncover reality instead of accepting the current dogma. In his article, “Can the Sciences Help Us to Make Wise Ethical Judgements?” Paul Kurtz argues that not only can science help through inquiry but it already plays an active role in shaping our moral conduct. According to him, ethical judgement and science meet somewhat halfway and although we cannot come up with a specific set of instructions
Then, using ART or not is a personal decision, taking into account all aspects that it involves. There are advantages for many people that have more value than the disadvantages. Nowadays, society is most morally permissible, and is concerned over personal needs more than the social consequences. Although there is always the preoccupation of the limits of science, but the most common thought is that "it is not an issue for us,” law, religion, and scientists are those who must solve it.
Bioethics was originated many centuries ago. Ethical theories in medicine are the basis of bioethics. There are many different ethical approaches which causes much dispute. The imperical question is, what makes an act right and which approach to follow. The Greeks addressed the virtue of ethics. They looked into the good of the person and the situation. Ethos in Greek means, disposition and trait. So consequently they looked at eh person’s skills, habits, and traits. Compassion and the meaning of suffering are some other issues in Bioethics that can be argued. Choosing an act because it is right and also looking at the consequences are some other concerns. Other things to consider are what the patient and their families want. Their religious beliefs are also a major concern. How far should someone go to help a dying suffering patient who wants to take their life? Is it right to intercept and help a patient to die? Medical technology is ever advancing. People are being kept alive for years on support. This is a major topic of debate in Bioethics. Deciding if it’s right or wrong to keep them alive even if they are brain dead is a major concern. What constitutes a person a person when they have Alzheimer’s or brain damage? Are they a person? These are some of the major topics discussed in Bioethics.
It’s interesting to note what happened to the art world after Duchamp revolutionized art into meaninglessness. Artists seem to be exempt from the moral laws that are binding to ordinary people. Everything is O.K. under art’s magic umbrella: rotting corpses with snails crawling over them, kicking little girls in the head, rape and murder recreations, women defecating. Where does it stop? What is art and what is porn? What is art and what is disgusting? Where is the line? There isn’t one anymore. The effect of Duchamp’s pranks was to point out that anything could be art. All it took was getting people to agree to call something art.
Goldblatt, and Brown. Aesthetics: A Reader in Philosophy of the Arts, Upper Saddle Ridge, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997.
Philosophies of Art and Beauty Edited by Hofstadter and Kuhns, (Chicago: University of Chicago press, 1976) chapters one and two for an overview of the aesthetics of Plato and Aristotle.
“The end justifies the means” is the famous quote of Machiavelli (Viroli, 1998) which puts the emphasis of morality on the finale results rather than the actions undertaken to achieve them. Is this claim true in the field of the natural sciences? Whether atomic bombings, as a mean used to end World War II, justifies the death of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What is moral limitation in the acquisition of knowledge in the natural sciences? How is art constrained by moral judgment?
For over two thousand years, various philosophers have questioned the influence of art in our society. They have used abstract reasoning, human emotions, and logic to go beyond this world in the search for answers about arts' existence. For philosophers, art was not viewed for its own beauty, but rather for the question of how art and artists can help make our society more stable for the next generation. Plato, a Greek philosopher who lived during 420-348 B.C. in Athens, and Aristotle, Plato’s student who argued against his beliefs, have no exceptions to the steps they had to take in order to understand the purpose of art and artists. Though these two philosophers made marvelous discoveries about the existence of art, artists, and aesthetic experience, Plato has made his works more controversial than Aristotle.
Production of knowledge is generally seen in a positive light. However, when ethics and morality become involved in the process of production, judgements will undoubtedly be made that may seem to limit the availability of that knowledge. Ethical judgements are made by the combination of a knower, his or her standard of value, and the situation itself. In the field of the arts and natural sciences, ethics plays a crucial role in the extent one may possibly be allowed to go to when discovering new knowledge. Reason and emotion are important ways of knowing that help guide knowers in making certain moral decisions. Both ways of knowing can be associated with teleological or deontological arguments; the ethics are based on either an objectives-focused or obligations-focused mindset. In this essay, I will be discussing the limitations set on both the arts and the natural sciences as areas of knowledge. To what extent do ethical implications hinder the way art can be produced or the methods involved in expanding society’s knowledge of science?
R. Howard Bloch once stated, “The humanities are an incredible source of practical information about the world around us”. The study of humanities has affected the life of every individual to walk the earth at some point in time; It seems sort of outrageous but it’s true. From art and literature to architecture and music, the humanities is present in our everyday lives. Its importance is often underestimated but in reality, it is extremely important to our existence. In fact, before entering my first humanities class I didn’t realize how important or interesting humanities was. After learning about how art, specifically, has changed over time, I find myself eager to learn more. The benefits of studying humanities includes: aiding individuals
The relationship between art and society: Mimesis as discussed in the works of Aristotle, Plato, Horace and Longinus The relationship between art and society in the works of Plato are based upon his idea of the world of eternal Forms. He believed that there is a world of eternal, absolute and immutable Forms (the world of the Ideal) and thought that this is proven by when man is faced with the appearance of anything in the material world, his mind is moved to a remembrance of the Idea or an absolute and immutable version of the thing he sees. It is this moment of recollection that he wonders about the contrast between the world of shadows and the world of the Ideal. It is in this moment of wondering that man struggles to reach the world of Forms through the use of reason. Anything then that does not serve reason is the enemy of man. Given this, it is only but logical that poetry should be eradicated from society. Poetry shifts man’s focus away from reason by presenting man with imitations of objects from the concrete world. Poetry, with its focus on mimesis or imitation, has no moral value. While Plato sees reality as a shadow of a realm of pure Ideas (which in turn is copied by art), Aristotle sees reality as a process of partially realized forms moving towards their ideal realizations. Given this idea by Aristotle, the mimetic quality of art is redefined as the duplication of the living process of nature and its need to reach its potential form.
Ethics is the study of moral values and the principles we use to evaluate actions. Ethical concerns can sometimes stand as a barrier to the development of the arts and the natural sciences. They hinder the process of scientific research and the production of art, preventing us from arriving at knowledge. This raises the knowledge issues of: To what extent do moral values confine the production of knowledge in the arts, and to what extent are the ways of achieving scientific development limited due to ethical concerns? The two main ways of knowing used to produce ethical judgements are reason, the power of the mind to form judgements logically , and emotion, our instinctive feelings . I will explore their applications in various ethical controversies in science and arts as well as the implications of morals in these two areas of knowledge.
Becoming advocates for social scientists have both benefits and drawbacks. On the good side, Gutting (2012) says that it can supplement general knowledge, critical intensity, practical experience and good sense. Gutting also says that scientists know where a certain piece of work falls in their relevant discipline. This allows them to be good advocates. Taking sides also allows social scientists to help curb harmful behaviors by conducting research on their harmful effects and discouraging the behaviors with facts. Examples are effects of drugs and substance abuse, risky sexual behaviors etc.