In Steven Katz’s “The Ethic of Expediency” Katz establishes early on that the Nazi memo, although morally shocking and seemingly cold, was “technically accurate and logically argued” (257). The memo discusses a problem inherent in technical writing that doesn’t seem apparent—ethics. Most industries and disciplines come with an ethical questions, but many are much more apparent. Medicine, academics, finance, all have an ethical question that is on the surface and the answer is always found or taught in the initial entrance into the field. Although some struggle to be ethically correct, there has never been a question of whether or not there is an ethical question. Because technical writing works with data sometimes from other fields, the ethical question is not always at the forefront.
One of the main tenets of Katz's article is that rhetoric should not only be concerned with end result but the way we arrive at the end. This relates to Quintilian's 'good man speaking well' and just about every other classic orator. Plato thoroughly discussed the pitfalls of rhetoric comparing it to drugs and a powerful lord among other things. Rhetoric can and has been used inappropriately, and that is why Katz's article is important to the field of technical communication and students learning the field.
I enjoy history and have always been interested in World War II. My Grandfather served in the navy and I grew up hearing his stories and watching documentaries. Just's memo is an example of the mind set of the Nazis during that time. Although they were concerned with the perfect race they neglected the aspect of humanity and committed the most unethical acts. The ethos and persuasion established by Hitler created a social situation that furthered the unethical acts and mindset. Technical writers should not be devoid of ethics or the sense of humanity when conveying technical data. There is always an ethical situation in every piece of communication produced.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
to have a open blogg means that comments are invited and I hope I am not stepping on any toes with this comment.
Never doubting that the Holocaust has to be considered the most cruel act against human beings I have to agree with Katz in general but I have to dismiss the sample he is basing his findings on. At best the sample can be seen as a secondary source. He is using the transcript from Claude Lanzmanns Shoah documentary. That means that Katz findings are not based on the Memo by Willy Just but on the script of a movie documentary quoting a poor English translation. Otherwise the statement would be about German rhetoric. The translation he is referring to is poorly and incomplete. It makes sense to refer to the much better and accurate translation by Mary Scott and Caroline Lloyd-Morris for Yale University in 1993, that can be found at http://www.holocaust-history.org/19420605-rauff-spezialwagen/
But again any statements would be about the translation and its author not about the original or it would have to be a statement about German rhetoric.
Post a Comment