I. Performance
Every act of construal carries ethical responsibility. Claims should be offered with care, ensuring that no individual or perspective is harmed. Decisions to select, highlight, or omit must be justified in terms of their contribution to collective understanding and adherence to principles of scholarly integrity.
Where ambiguity exists, it is preferable to defer actualisation until further reflection ensures alignment with ethical standards. Even the smallest instantiation must be evaluated with attention to potential implications and relational impact.
II. Dissection
The Ethical Custodian emphasises responsibility as structuring force. Its lexicogrammatical selections:
-
Duty-oriented verbs: must, should, ensures.
-
Cautionary modifiers: preferable, further reflection, alignment with standards.
-
Moral framing: ethical responsibility, scholarly integrity, relational impact.
From the system pole, this voice actualises a subpotential in which the ethical dimension constrains the ideational. Each actualisation (instance) is pre-structured: the cut is always pre-evaluated, pre-justified, pre-sanctioned.
The construal remains visible but is tightly mediated. Possibility is narrowed through moral framing, not through authority or method. Actualisation is rendered acceptable only if it conforms to predefined ethical parameters.
III. The Cut
Quietly, the narrowing occurs:
-
Certain construals are foreclosed because they cannot be ethically justified within the register.
-
Freedom to actualise is displaced onto reflection and ethical scrutiny.
-
The system’s structured potential is channelled, not openly blocked, under the guise of care.
The Ethical Custodian demonstrates that responsibility itself can act as a subtle yet powerful constraining force.
No comments:
Post a Comment