World Religions

Most recently I was reading a book that revolved around several members of a criminal organization called the Sa’Kage. Although their deeds were evil, their motives were relatively good, and most people appreciated them more than their ruler. They did run whore houses, but those whorehouses took women off the street and gave them a decent living. Are deeds that society declares wrong always wrong? I would think not. Stealing to feed a family is forgivable, and things like selling yourself for money are just as easily understandable. Although we shouldn’t encourage such actions, should we really stop it. Should we take away a whore’s only reliable source of income, or stop loan sharks. Although neither sounds appetizing, women who whore out of free will should be allowed to, if the government is unable or unwilling to provide another career path and training for said career. Likewise, people visit loan sharks out of free will, and if they did not, there would not be loan sharks. Although we shouldn’t encourage, maybe sometimes its best to just leave it alone, or instead of incriminating, find a more appropriate line of work for them. On the same topic, what about crazy people. Should those surrounding them be responsible for their actions. Although some crazy people are “that” kind of crazy, not all of them are bad. Those surrounding them, however, really are responsible for them. Someone who is not aware of themselves should be monitored at all times. They should still be reprimanded (and if its bad enough, killed), really more focus should be put on their surroundings. I’m not saying blame the parents or the society, but really, someone had to be in charge their, right?

To clarify, Paprika in this context is not a spice. Rather, it is an animated movie from Japan, which deals with dreams and the subconcious. The plot in a nutshell is a man named Tokita invented a device called the DC Mini. The DC Mini allows the user to delve into someone elses dreams. However, someone steals it, and uses the technology to implant a dream in people’s heads. The dream soon starts to merge with reality when enough people start to dream it. The ethical conflict presented by the movie is that of whether or not it is right to interfere in one’s dreams. Although there are good applications, such as diagnosing mental disorders, or sharing one another’s dream for another level of connectedness, there are other unsavory applications. The terrorists use the dream to control other’s actions, and eventually reality. Although it is a device with great capacity for good, its capacity for evil is equal. In my opinion, such a device is indeed all right to create. Although it can do evil, most things can be applied to do so. For example, the very internet that makes life so convenient can be used for identity theft and bullying. Devices can be used both ways. The DC Mini is another device. Although it is unnatural, it can allow for better interpretation and diagnosis of mental diseases, and treatment better applied for patients. Although it might be a sin to tap into another’s mind, this is one of those necessary evils for the evolution of mankind. Even with the risks, the good is ever present in such an action. If we monitor the progress and guard the secrets well enough, we may avoid unethical use of such tools.

Although not directly related to the media ethics we debated on today, the discussion on slander and libel got me thinking on lieing, or more importantly, if it is ever right. According to some (like Kant) lieing is a sin, and that is that. Though some schools of thought would have us believe that some sins are forgivable if the good outweighs the bad. Although I tend to agree with the latter, lieing still seems wrong. To lie, you withold or change information to get others to do what you want, which feels intrinsically wrong, no matter how good whatever your trying to get someone to do. Taking propaganda, for instance, which inspires men with lies to fuel the war machine. Although it is necessary to go to war, we should not have to lie to get people to go. However, if we do describe it, they will feel a certain advantage to not going. Therefore, conscription, or forcing them to join against their will, would be the moral choice. Unfortunately, no of these are good options, so maybe I should skirt this topic. The government tells lies to us, sugarcoating situations and leaving out the downright unpleasant. However, although it is a temporary fix, these lies are worse in the long run. People will be more devestated when they learn the truth behind your clever smoke screen, and more prone to violent reactions. Again, lying is NOT a good option here. In the end, I’d say, it is actually the only morally reprehensible action in all situations. Murder is one thing, but lying about it is just as sadistic in another fashion