Morality Essay Essay

In 1994 Kevin Carter advance the Pulitzer Prize for photography thanks to a photograph that he took in the village of Ayod in Sudan of a nestling creeping towards a feeding center. Whether it was moralisticly justly for him to capture captured that moment instead of back up the baby bird is a debate with umpteen slew. Some deal suppose that it was powerful beca workout it jockstraped pause the famine in Africa, differents swear it was ill-timed because he did non serve the child after taking the calculate.It is soundless that on that testify was thousands of refugees walking and crawling towards the sustenance center, so was he suppose to stand by everyone or just that child? In philosophy class we assume been talk about Morality in Kants range of sentiment which is the Categorical arrogant and also about the Morality send of panorama based on Consequentialism. I cerebrate that it was not mor on the wholey allowable for Kevin Carter to digress th e child because of Kants point of view on Morality, and that he should lease not won the Pulitzer Prize for Photography based on this photo and I will explain why in this essay.According to Kant we should base ethical motive on the Universal Law which means we should extrapolate our actions. This law is the same as the comfortable Rule Treat others the representation you desire to be treated. What Kant established basically was that we should effect note all persons morally equal. The Consequentialism point of view on morality on the other hand is that we should base it on the dominion of utilitarianism which means that for an action to be moral it must produce The Greatest kernel of Good for the Greatest amount of tidy sum.Even though I obtain with the consquentialism point of view on morality I do not restrain with it this time. Why? Because I gestate that at all times we should treat others the means we deficiency to be treated and that all humans are equal. This i s why when reply our question I based my serve up on Kants point of view based on morality. I hope that it was not morally permissible for Kevin Carter to leave the child after he took the picture. branch of all I believe that Kevin should halt not interpreted the picture period, he should spend a penny right away went to uphold the child.Like Kant said we should treat others the way we want to be treated, if Carter was in a position ilk that he would substantiate not resemblingd to be leftfield on that point to his own luck. I examine that Carter had a professional obligation where he is only an observer not a participant, which means he was only there to observe and say pictures of the whole situation. I also understand that he was there illegally and that he did not want to obtain caught nevertheless he had a personal responsibility to second the child.In passage given to us by Professor Jordan it is said that Carter was with a concourse of photojournalist calle d the Bang-Bang Club by a Johannesburg magazine. These people cherished to make the institution sensible of all the issues of injustice. There is where I believe that Carters personal responsibility plays role. Carter wanted the world do be as authoritatived of all the issues going around the world and for them to help. They were there because they wanted other countries all around the world to stop the famine, yet he did not help a child when it was in his hands to help that child and just left.Carter here was contradicting his believes to place with. Carter did not only just take the picture but waited several transactions for the predatory animal to spread his wings so he could get a to a greater extent dramatic shot. Carter did not only use the child to get a picture but waited patiently to get a better picture instead of scaring the vulture right away from the child and component part him or her. There were more pictures that could claim impacted us, and I am certain(p ) that if he looked around he would devote found this is why I do not believe he should drive taken the picture.I do not believe that he should have won the Pulitzer Prize for Photography based on that photo. I think that it was wrong to win a prize by apply other people. Carter use the child and did not even aid the child. Considering that I believe that it was wrong for Carter to have even taken that picture I strongly do not believe that he should have won that prize. Carter could have used every other photograph to get his point crosswise yet he headstrong to use that one and take his winning time to take it anyways, he used the child and did not help her.I honestly do no believe that he should have one that prize. In Conclusion I believe that Carter should have not used the child to take that picture, and he shouldnt have won the prize. I believe that Carter had the responsibility to help the child because he saw the child suffering and in danger of get attacked by the vu lture. Given the fact that he was the only one there he had the responsibility to help the child. We should do unto others what we would like to be done to us. If I was in that childs position I would have liked to be helped like I am sure Carter would have too.I think that if Carter would have helped the child he would have not been gloomy and committer suicide because he would have cognise he did something good by percentage the child. Like I said in the lead I am pretty sure he could have chosen other photograph to get his point across to have people help stop the famine. Besides he wanted people to help yet it was in his pass by to help this child and he did not? He was going against his own believes in my opinion. I believe that it was morally wrong for Carter to not help the child get to the food bank or at least a safer place, closer to were that child could get the help needed.