Morality Essay Essay

In 1994 Kevin Carter won the Pulitzer wampum for Photography give thanks to a word-paintinggraph that he took in the village of Ayod in Sudan of a chela weirdo towards a feeding center. Whether it was chastely right for him to overhear captured that moment kind of of cooperateing the tike is a postulate with many people. Some people cogitate that it was right because it sustained jam the famine in Africa, opposites confide it was slander because he did non aid the electric razor after taking the motion picture.It is understood that t here(predicate) was thousands of refugees walking and crawling towards the food center, so was he theorize to wait on every integrity or solo that pip-squeak? In philosophy class we contain been talking about devotion in Kants token of view which is the two-dimensional Imperative and also about the Morality range of view establish on Consequentialism. I confide that it was not virtuously permissible for Kevin Carter to lea ve the chela because of Kants aspire of view on Morality, and that he should contribute not won the Pulitzer Prize for Photography base on this photo and I will explain wherefore in this essay.According to Kant we should base ethics on the Universal Law which agent we should universalize our actions. This law is the same as the Golden Rule Treat others the route you want to be discretioned. What Kant established essentially was that we should respect all persons chastely equal. The Consequentialism point of view on morality on the other hand is that we should base it on the principle of utilitarianism which means that for an action to be moral it must produce The greatest sum of money of Good for the Greatest amount of people.Even though I agree with the consquentialism point of view on morality I do not agree with it this time. Why? Because I commit that at all times we should speak others the way we want to be tempered and that all humans are equal. This is why when a nswering our question I based my answer on Kants point of view based on morality. I believe that it was not morally permissible for Kevin Carter to leave the small fry after he took the picture. First of all I believe that Kevin should reach not eventn the picture period, he should withstand right international went to aid the child.Like Kant verbalise we should treat others the way we want to be treated, if Carter was in a set like that he would have not liked to be left in that location to his aver luck. I understand that Carter had a professional indebtedness where he is exactly an observer not a participant, which means he was only there to observe and take pictures of the consentaneous situation. I also understand that he was there illegally and that he did not want to permit caught yet he had a personal accountability to process the child.In passage given to us by Professor Jordan it is said that Carter was with a group of photojournalist called the Bang-Bang C lub by a Johannesburg magazine. These people valued to make the innovation aware of all the issues of injustice. There is where I believe that Carters personal responsibility plays role. Carter wanted the world do be aware of all the issues going rough 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 work force to help that child and just left.Carter here was contradicting his believes to start with. Carter did not only just take the picture but waited several(prenominal) minutes for the vulture to spread his go so he could germinate a more than dramatic shot. Carter did not only use the child to get a picture but waited patiently to get a better picture or else of scaring the vulture right away from the child and helping him or her. There were more pictures that could have impacted us, and I am current that if he looked around he would have found this is why I do not believe he should have 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 using other people. Carter apply the child and did not pull down aid the child. Considering that I believe that it was wrong for Carter to have even taken that picture I powerfully do not believe that he should have won that prize. Carter could have used any other photograph to get his point across yet he decided to use that one and take his sweet 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 axiom the child suffering and in risk of infection of getting attacked by the vulture. Given the item that he was the on ly 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 depressed and committer suicide because he would have known he did something good by helping the child. Like I said before I am bewitching sure he could have elect another photograph to get his point across to have people help stop the famine. Besides he wanted people to help yet it was in his reach 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, adjacent to were that child could get the help needed.