Ethical

Ethical comes from the Greek ethos, which is a persons "moral character". This "moral character" is part of a persons or groups ideologies that answer the question, what is right and wrong. As of today, their is no universal answer to this question, since many different groups around the world have their own ideas of what is considered ethical behavior. This in part comes from the many religious beliefs individuals possess. Religion has always played a large role in deciding whether or not a certain behavior or practice is considered ethical or not. Religion is not necessary in labeling something as ethical. It is also a way of protecting yourself from the people around you.

By agreeing that killing someone is unethical, we are safe to walk outside without having to constantly worry about being shot or hit by a car. Whether or not killing is actually ethical or not does not matter in this context because it keeps everyone safe. The only problem with considering this act unethical is some people may think otherwise and not care about the punishment that comes with commiting this "crime". This turns our safe net into a potential hazard because it causes us to lower our guard. Carry items such as guns or knives, which we could use to protect ourselves from a "criminal", become unethical as well. Now when someone decides to disagree with our code of ethical behavior, we are in more danger than we would have if we never decided to make killing unethical. Another problem with this scenario is what if you are capable of defending yourself against the killer, but you accidentally kill that person. You did not have to kill that person, but you had to if you wanted to live. Therefore, is there a difference between ethical and unethical killing? This is a type of ethical law that lawyers and judges have to decide on daily. There is no one answer that could justify either cases and is left to the ideologies of the people deciding.

My group came to the issue of ethical research while working on a project. We had to decide if it is ethical to talk to someone on a dating website for research purposes. Before we started the research, we did not of any morality in using the internet for research, even if the research is on a dating website. The website is simply a virtual space for people to meet, so it is not really there. Once we started our research, we realized that even though the medium itself does not exist, the people on it do. They are real people communicating on their computer looking for a relationship and even though they could never know who we are or what our intentions are, we still felt we were violating the rules of ethical research. Each of these rules were different for everyone in the group, but they ended our research sooner than we expected all the same. This showed how each person in our group could have a different concept of ethical research, yet it led to the same outcome, the end of our research.

When trying to decide how ethical a certain idea is, we come to find that there is no clear answer. Choosing a certain side as ethical can also be contradictory at times since both sides may seem ethically sound. This is a subject people have to face in their everyday life and what is ethical to one person is not necessarily the same for another. Even when people respond the same to a certain problem this is not always due to the same ethical beliefs, but instead the whole of their ideological beliefs.

circles + orange = danger

The first thing you probably think when you see such a container is danger, don't touch. It's not necessary to know what is in this red container except it can potentially hurt or kill you. This is mainly due to the biohazard symbol over an orange background. A biological hazard, or biohazard, is anything coming from a living microbe that is dangerous to humans. Since this box is red, it only contains material contaminated with blood. This can be extremely threatening to a persons health since blood can potentially carry deadly bacteria, viruses, etc. A question that arises is how a simple, meaningless symbol and two colors have come to represent danger?

The color orange is one of the most important parts of the biohazard symbol. Orange is very vibrant, noticeable, and is second to yellow in visibility. It is not too bright like yellow though, therefore it does not cause eye strain very quickly. Also, orange is a complement of blue which causes orange to be more visible outside and makes it more pleasing to view. These qualities of orange make it very useful when making a warning sign because this color makes the sign stand out. When in a room or, even more so, outside an orange sign will be the first to catch someones eye. This is necessary if people are expected to see such a sign so they can be more cautious in a room with biohazardous materials. This color is important, but it is meaningless in this context without the biohazard symbol.

The biohazard symbol was invented by scientists that wanted something easy to recognize and produce. A study was conducted to find which symbol people thought represented a biohazard and the symbol used today was chosen. This was an ideal choice since the symbol is easy to draw. A black writing utensil and drawing compass are the only pieces of equipment required so anyone can make it if necessary. Drawing the symbol in black is critical if you wish to optimize its visibility and importance in any situation. Black can be seen from a farther distance and if any brighter color was chose, then the visibility range would be reduced. Drawn over an orange background makes an aesthetically pleasing sign.

It's interesting how a few circles drawn together can hold a strong meaning. Since it is so simple though, it is memorable and can be seen from any orientation. Also, no words are necessary which makes the sign an ideal candidate for a warning sign.