Abstract

Few means provide us with more controversial and interesting materials in a moral sense than television contents do nowadays. By showing many cases which involve a conflict of rights and values, it gives plenty of opportunities for moral reflection. It is a very valuable instrument since it offers us relevant present problems, which are also very easy to understand and motivating for young people. This paper is intended to make some suggestions in order to foster the didactic use of some television contents. More specifically, it is intended to show the possibilities that moral dilemmas offer for this purpose. Accordingly, I will put forward some dilemmas which have been built from television materials, as well as several indications for its didactic use and a field research example about them.

Abstract

El artículo cuestiona la efectividad del modelo de razonamiento ético de la Potter box en cuanto a su aplicación a dilemas de ética de la información. No obstante su importancia para fomentar el debate racional sobre ética aplicada, este modelo, como probablemente todos los modelos de razonamiento ético, es incapaz de determinar la teoría moral que mejor podría justificar el curso de acción justo en los casos más dilemáticos. A partir de varios ejemplos presentados en Media ethics: Cases and moral reasoning (Christians et al., 2005), mostraremos que las decisiones morales, en última instancia, radican en lo que Paul Ricoeur llama “convicción”. Ninguna solución para dilemas éticos puede ser encontrada a priori. Ese es el drama de la acción. Abstract This article questions the effectiveness of the Potter box model of moral reasoning when applied to information ethical dilemmas. Though its importance in feeding the desirable rational debate on ethical problems, this model, and probably all models, fails in the most problematic cases to solve the question of which theory best fits to a particular situation. With the help of some examples provided in Media ethics: Cases and moral reasoning (Christians et al., 2005), we will seek to demonstrate that ultimately decisions are grounded in what Paul Ricoeur calls “conviction”. No solutions to ethical dilemmas can be found a priori. That is the drama of action.