Under the auspices of/Sous l'égide de - International Academy of ...

27facing the post-maecenic writer, the impetus towards self-destruction ingrained in the poet’s modus vivendiultimately finding allegorical expression in the pathological functioning of the self-consuming romanticaesthetic artefact.5.3. Moral Communities and Moral UniversalismDonald Ipperciel, University of Alberta (donald.ipperciel@ualberta.ca)Since Kant’s formulation of the universal moral law, morality has been defined in terms of universality.Today, the “moral point of view,” understood as a principle of impartiality, reflects the Kantian concern foruniversalism. At the level of justification of norms, moral universalism is quite compelling. But at the levelof application of norms, it seems to come short of being truly useful or practical.Moral universalism seems to negate the true experience of the other by bringing every human being to anequal status of dignity. In so doing, it defines a “we,” a sameness or an identity lumping together all ofhumanity, leaving no space for otherness with a human face. “Other” applies then only to non-humanentities.Evidently, I will not be trying to do away with equal dignity, which is a fundamental tenet of Westernmorality. But on the other hand, morality has to be made relevant for our daily lives. It has to be practicaland reflect our daily experiences, especially our experiences of otherness. Moral arguments that eliminateotherness may simplify moral problems, but at the cost of making itself irrelevant to practical use.By introducing the notion of “moral community,” I will try to maintain the validity of moral universalismwhile finding a legitimate space for otherness in the sphere of morality. The goal will be to preserve thecomplexity of concrete moral problems – in order to make moral reasoning relevant to the lived situations –while respecting universal principles – thereby affirming the “moral point of view.”More specifically, this paper will try to propose answers to questions such as: “What is the medicalpractitioner’s responsibility towards Third World populations?”; “Is there an order of priority regarding theservices and help rendered to patients?”; “While delivering care services, is it morally right to favour oneperson or one group over another?” etc.5.4. The Influence of Contemporary Media on the “Otherness” of the Mentally IllCheryl Webster, Capital Health, Edmonton, Canada (clw2@ualberta.ca)Contemporary media has a profound impact on the development of public opinion and public attitudestowards people with disabilities. These attitudes impact the lives of people with mental illness. Mentalillness is relatively common. Approximately 20 percent of the population in Alberta, Canada were treatedfor mental health problems in 2002-2003. Despite the banality of mental illness, media representations ofpeople with mental illness are so powerful that they override the public’s personal experiences in relation tohow they view mental illness. Inaccurate portrayals influence the generation of public opinion regardinghow a person with this disability should be treated and views of how this disability should be managed. Asconsumers of contemporary media we must think about the messages contained within this genre andrecognize oppressive, prejudicial, and discriminatory content that perpetuates stereotypes of people withmental illness. It is these stereotypes that typically result in power-over versus power-with dynamicsforming between people with mental illness and those without. The main consequence of this dynamic isthe de-humanization of the other. From a relational ethic perspective a relationship is unable to form when