Plaisance, Ch. 6 and Ch. 3 “Autonomy” And “Transparency”

Freedom vs. Autonomy Freedom (negative sense) – “freedom from” – Absence of restraints Autonomy (positive freedom) – “freedom to” – The capacity to govern ourselves

Autonomy as the Moral Concept Plaisance: “what we ought to do if we are to take our role as moral agents seriously” Dworkin: “[individuals] define their nature, give meaning and coherence to their lives, and take responsibility for the kind of person they are” Benn: autonomy “requires that the subject’s belief be coherent and consistent” and arises from “a continuing process of critical adjustment within a system of beliefs”

Kant’s Categorical Imperatives “... As a moral being, I must strive to ensure that I treat others with respect, not because I fear them or because I might benefit from doing so... If I deal with others in ways that are designed to further my own interests, I am effectively reducing people to means to my own ends instead of treating them as ends in themselves. This... Reduces humans to objects or mere tools, which is a failure to properly appreciate the specialness of human beings”—THEIR AUTONOMY

Application: Transparency Plaisance defines transparency: “Transparent behavior can be defined as conduct the presumes an OPENNESS in communication and serves a reasonable expectation of forthright exchange when parties have a LEGITIMATE STAKE in the possible outcomes of effects of the sending or receiving of the message. It is an attitude of PROACTIVE MORAL ENGAGEMENT that manifests an express concern for the PERSONS-AS-ENDS PRINCIPLE when a degree of deception or omission can reasonable be said to risk thwarting the receiver’s due DIGNITY or the ability to exercise reason.”

Transparency in the Media Journalism Public relations Advertising