Ethics and Ethnomusicology: Difference between revisions

From Canadian Centre for Ethnomusicology
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
** Informed consent (dignity; duty)
** Informed consent (dignity; duty)
** Privacy: anonymity and confidentiality, as requested (duty)
** Privacy: anonymity and confidentiality, as requested (duty)
* Philosophical ethics: Deontological (focus on duty to respect human rights) and consequentialist (focus on maximizing {\textstyle \sum }{\textstyle \sum }outcomes) positions and how to resolve them.
* Philosophical ethics: Deontological (focus on duty to respect human rights) and consequentialist (focus on maximizing Σ {outcomes}, whether + or -) positions and how to resolve them.
** Problems:  deontological (whose rights?); consequentialist (how to sum?)
** Problems:  deontological (whose rights?); consequentialist (how to sum?)
** Traditional ethics: The Golden Rule
** Traditional ethics: The Golden Rule

Revision as of 22:23, 24 January 2022

  • Ethics: the Good.
    • Human rights, such as freedom and equality, as minima (equal inputs) and emergence (where freedom, say, may lead to inequality)
    • Social justice (equal outcomes; may require equity rather than equality on input)
    • Deontological vs. Consequentialist approaches towards Ethical Action.
  • Key ethical principles (cited in research literature) balance the deontological (duty: action inputs, intentions) with the consequentialist (action outcomes, cost/benefit assessments). The following are often cited:
    • Humanity: respecting human dignity and rights--minima--and avoiding exploitation (duty)
    • Beneficence (ensuring that good outweighs harm) (outcome)
    • Equality (social justice, equal outcomes)
    • Informed consent (dignity; duty)
    • Privacy: anonymity and confidentiality, as requested (duty)
  • Philosophical ethics: Deontological (focus on duty to respect human rights) and consequentialist (focus on maximizing Σ {outcomes}, whether + or -) positions and how to resolve them.
    • Problems: deontological (whose rights?); consequentialist (how to sum?)
    • Traditional ethics: The Golden Rule
    • Kantian ethics - the categorical imperative: action considered a necessary end in itself (vs the hypothetical imperative: an action to achieve a particular end)
      • "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law")
      • "Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end."
    • Habermas: Communicative Action (treating people as a communicative end, not a means - illocutionary mood)
    • Utilitarians, e.g. Jeremy Bentham (consequentialist): consequential summation of an action's positive and negative effects ("cost/benefit analysis"). Conundrums: The trolley problem. Weaknesses: The transplant problem.
  • Ethnomusicology
    • Why is ethics important for ethnomusicology? What are the ethical implications of our work? How would you compare ethics in ethnomusicology to that of, say, psychology, engineering, or medicine?
    • Why is it especially important for applied ethnomusicology (and M4GHD projects)?
      • The ethical impetus behind M4GHD (and Community Music Therapy) itself
      • Their focus on disempowered or marginalized communities
      • Potential pitfalls: can you think of ethical problems that may arise in the course of ethnomusicological research? (think about conflicts in "doing the right thing" conflict?)
    • Discussion:
      • Ethical conundrums in ethnomusicology! What happens when various ethical principles (or applications) conflict? What do you do in such cases? (e.g. the good of the whole as opposed to the good of the individual; deception as a valid tradeoff for important information...)
      • Come up with an ethnomusicological conundrum of your own.
  • Research Ethics documents applicable to the UofA