• lmmarsano
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    To answer your question, it’s more about arguing for basic freedoms consistently than about arguing for disrespect.

    When approaching these ethical questions, I think it’s best to focus on the individual & moral reciprocity: should someone be able to express themselves in a way that offends me? As long as it obeys the harm principle, the answer is yes. Accordingly, anyone should be free to express themselves with imagery in the style of Ghibli (using tools such as AI) even if it offends the studio’s founder, since it results in no actual harm.

    Since morality should be based on universal principles that don’t depend on contingent facts of an agent (such as their characteristics), I find it clarifies questions to approach technology with their non-technological equivalents. Would it be wrong to train a person to learn Ghibli art style so they could produce similar works in that style on demand? The harm of that is unclear, and I would think it’s fine.

    I don’t see a general duty for a free society to fulfill a wish unless it’s more of a claim right than a wish. In particular, criticism is a basic part of art: a duty not to criticize artists (who wish not to be criticized) would be unjust. While an artist should get credit (and all due intellectual property rights) for their work, once it’s out in the wild it takes on a life of its own: people are free to criticize it, parody it, & make fair use of it. Some wishes don’t need to be fulfilled.

    • JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      You really just wrote 4 paragraphs to say “I wanna make other people upset for my own personal gain at little to no benefit to the world at large”

      • lmmarsano
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Not at all: logical ethical principles (golden rule, harm principle, freedom of the individual) & basic individual liberties in a free society. Such a society where people are free to express themselves without doing actual harm is a benefit to the world “at large”. The alternative would be bleak.

        • JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          Okay, fine. I’ll do big words with you.

          Let’s talk about the difference between Ethics and Morals. Ethics are what you individually follow, it’s your Ethos. Morals are what a society follows.

          It may be morally correct to say that “people should be allowed to do as they please” while also ethically correct to say “you shouldn’t disrespect people’s wishes.”

          You’re right, that it is moral for someone to imitate art. At least, in our culture. But that’s because most people follow the ethos that they can do and take as they please. I personally hold myself to a higher standard than that, and I hope you can do the same some day.

          Edit to add: Fuck the golden rule. Follow the Platinum rule.