Morals and ethics are both codes of conduct relating to right and wrong. Whilst ethics are dependent on an exterior source of rules, regulations and sometimes law, such as the code of conduct in a public space or a work place, morals can be defined as an individual’s own principles of right and wrong and can go against ethical rules. Morals, therefore, truly define an individual’s take on what is right and wrong, despite what ethical principles they may follow. An individual’s moral outlook may change as they become more aware of the world around them and learn more about issues which require moral attention. As it is produced by and for individuals with their own morals, art’s connection to both the Art World and reality, ties it up in all sorts of moral issues. The question of whether art can effect our moral outlook is asking whether an individual’s perception of right and wrong can be altered by experiencing a work of art. This essay will explore the moral effect of art on audiences, and question where the responsibility for this …show more content…
The clarificationist believes that the engagement of morals is not a consequence of the art but an inherent part of engaging with the work in the first place. If an individual is engaging their pre-existing ‘good morals’ by engaging with a ‘morally good’ book, Caroll argues there is possibility and potential for this engagement to result in positive behavioural change. In simple terms, for the clarificationist, engaging with art IS engaging the morals, and that engagement might result in altering behaviour due to a ‘moral