ETHICS IN COMMUNICATION

Ethic is emerged as a set of values that have been accepted by a certain cultural environment to regulate people’s relations and implementing these values, often in the form of “good-bad”, ‘ to do – not to do’ and it can be stated as the qualification of discussing, considering, criticizing if necessary and acting according to these values, principles, orders and rules in contrast to the sum of traditional principles, orders and customary rules. In other words, ethics, which is a philosophical reasoning about the action itself, was accepted by Ancient Greek philosophy for the first time in this sense and systematized by Aristotle as a different field of philosophy (Özlem, 2010: 29).

Foucault describes knowing in order to change the surrounded lines and borders that determine, subjectify, and establish us with power analysis, thus he tells ethics, which is the way of people to establish relationship on their own. For Foucault, within this scope, ethics refers to all kinds of practices, techniques and knowledge that take the possibilities of subjectivation from their power and present them to individuals. Subjectivity is a fiction for Foucault, and it is formed as a result of innate or predetermined areas of experience in the hands of ←8 | 9→administrative power and relations, so it does not have its own reality or structure. Foucault says that this process can be rejected and confuted to save subjectivity and the individual from such a formation. In this way, Foucault values and benefits from a form of freedom that emphasize a new type of self. For Foucault, who states that subjectivity is established by relations of obedience, power, and force that are ubiquitous and shaping human beings, ethics provides individuals a right to resist these relations and forces.

The moral theory is decisive in Kant’s views on ethics, and Kant states that the rational and the empirical were mixed in the popular moral philosophy of the period. First of all, since these must be separated from each other, the separation of empirical and rational, which is a priori validity, from each other in the field of morality is of great importance for Kant, who is looking for universal consent (Akarsu, 1998: 97). Instead of theories based on moral goals, moral feelings, and divine will, as in classical eudemonistic theories, Kant establishes ethics only on the autonomy of the human mind. Kant dwells on the distinction between rational common sense or self-interest about Eudaimonism and theories of what is morally virtuous, or right is sharp; because Kant does not see happiness as the ultimate goal (Wood, 1993: 211). Of course, happiness is also valuable, and it is necessary to strive for happiness, but our moral consciousness (conscience) shows us the good first. When there is an action contrary to happiness, the tendencies remain in the background, so happiness depends on different things. On the other hand, the will does not depend on anything else, it is absolutely valuable. Man becomes a moral being in the position of subject when he is governed by pure reason, which does not consider happiness as a priority.

Hegel’s ethics is a term that (moral philosophy) comes from the words “ethos, Moralitat (morality)” from Greek, “ mos (plural: mores) and Sittlichkeit (moral life)” from Latin and “Sitte” from German. Moralitat is the morality that increases our self-consciousness, includes the most basic feature of the modern state, and expresses inner will and intention. Sittlichkeit is the moral life that explains one’s external behavior and consequences. At this point, Hegel agrees Kant’s following opinions; “to be moral is to be rational. Rationality is the basic essence of one’s nature and therefore being moral means being free” (Inwood, 2005: 319–320). In addition, Hegel’s ideas about ethics can be discussed in three different points that complement each other. The first of these is the approach that he discussed particularly in his work called “The Phenomenology of Spirit.” In this work, Hegel questions the concepts of freedom and spirit. The second is Hegel’s approach to philosophy of history. At this point, Hegel focuses upon the historical development of freedom. The third point of view is Hegel’s “Principles of the Philosophy of Law”. In this work, Hegel especially examines the relationship ←9 | 10→among the individual, society, and the state, and he questions the existence of individuality as a subject in society, that is, how freedom can co-exist despite society (Benhabib, 1999: 104).