| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | Ethics: how do you deal with harmful or misleading materials? Thread poster: Dan Dascalescu
|
|---|
| Good question. Next question please. | Nov 8, 2012 |
Dan Dascalescu wrote: Even if you tolerate stories about poltergeist, UFOs, conspiracy theories or other hoaxes and irrational nonsense (this graphic is delightful), having in mind that particularly in the medical field, material that advocates unproven alternative medicine "therapies" often ends up hurting or killing people, shouldn't ProZ take a more active role in preventing these activities? While not ending up in censoring the site, I believe something should be done to strongly discourage translators for taking contracts involving these sorts of materials. Are there policies on this topic?
What are you proposing? I'll me more than interested in your ideas on mind control?
By the way "alternative medicine" is used as term to describe "alternative schools of medicine" compared to the so called "academic medicine". Both types of medicine are built on believes and ideas. Having worked as a medical doctor for years in academic medicine I have seen dramatic success stories with e. g. acupuncture in patients we were unable to help with our academic medicine.
I have more than once openly critizied "alternative medicine" based therapies in my ICU and after measuring the effect and having learned the concepts behind them I had to admit that they just work and were based on a much more advanced understanding of the human physiology compared to what I learned at medical school.
Knowledge is constantly developing and what we consider quackery today, could be the standard of academic medicine tomorrow.
I also agree that there is a lot of rubbish in this field and a lot of people suffer because they believe in this rubbish. But I don't want to play judge on what is scientifc/academic and what is quackery.
Don't forget the godfather of "academic medicine":
Hippokrates
Medicus curat, natura sanat
| | | | | That is a very sound point, Jenny | Nov 8, 2012 |
Jenny Forbes wrote:
I don't know about the particular text under discussion, but consider the possibility that the translation might be needed in order to investigate/prosecute/stop the practice concerned. Do you know what the client wants the translation for?
How can the police/courts deal with possible crimes/frauds unless they understand the content of documents, websites, etc. that may be criminal/fraudulent?
Jenny
And I'll try to make another
There are plenty of ethical problems in the world, just like the one made by the original poster of this topic. If the responses here were given in our native languages, you'd refuse to translate them just because some are (or may be) contrary to your own beliefs? Discussion implies the prerequisite of communication...
And if you take any decision in your life, you want to see the arguments of only one side, or both (perhaps more)? To judge anything wrong, you need to understand it first. How to do it without translation if the opinions are voiced in an unknown language?
| | | | | Interesting topic - diffcult to deal with | Nov 8, 2012 |
The problem of quackery is one that I am thinking about a lot. I don't work in medical translation, nor have I been offered to translate such material, but I have many friends that are - how to say this nicely - rather opposed to what they call academic medicine and traditional science. I myself, though remaining open minded, am not too inclined in believing anything science has not proven (yet). This wouldn't be a problem - I don't have to agree with them in anything, and we could still be frie... See more The problem of quackery is one that I am thinking about a lot. I don't work in medical translation, nor have I been offered to translate such material, but I have many friends that are - how to say this nicely - rather opposed to what they call academic medicine and traditional science. I myself, though remaining open minded, am not too inclined in believing anything science has not proven (yet). This wouldn't be a problem - I don't have to agree with them in anything, and we could still be friends.
The problem starts when it involves their children. These people will not vaccine their kids - they believe in this story that came up some years ago (and has been disproven since then) of vaccines causing autism. When their kids suffer of anything more serious (ear infections, tick bite, whatever) they will be very reluctant in letting them have antibiotics. They treat health issues that would otherwise be uncomplicated with homeopathic sugar pills till they do get complicated.
And here is the point where I totally understand Dan. This does envolve practical ethics. Far from some barcharts posted online, there are these kids, I know some of them since they were born. What if one of these kids dies one day or stays with permanent damage because his parents were afraid to give an antibiotic? Could I still call those people my friends? Would I feel for not making more effort to convince them otherwise?
I don't think that controlling the translation market is helpful. First - It cannot be controlled. Second - Where were the limits to be set? Censorship lurks, I wouldn't want that.
I have come to realize that it is difficult to discuss with this kind of people. They believe in things because they WANT them to be true. They don't understand the scientific method - but they love pseudoscience (like Emotos beautiful water cristals and homeopathy) because it makes them believe a life based on love is possible. It is happy hippie paradise. Strange enough, the water never seems to remember all the toilets it went through. It only remembers what homeopathy wants it to remember.
Maybe the only way to convince people is through carefully served information. Of course nobody wants to be called stupid - so one has to be careful. I believe that some TV shows like "Mythbusters" and similar things are great education materials - they are gross and silly in a way, but they do introduce kids to the scientific method in a fun and attractive way. It would have to be done in this way. They won't listen if we shout at them... ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member because it was not in line with site rule |
|
|
| A site cannot discourage things based on personal preferences | Nov 8, 2012 |
Proz.com cannot impose restrictions on translation topics based on personal likes or dislikes of one, several, or a group of users. Full stop. Any other consideration is futile, I think.
After all, the OP is proposing his list of things he personally dislikes. If a site like Proz.com "strongly discouraged" translating about these things, the same rule could be applied to everyone else (I think I can come up with quite a list of things we could do without in our world), and in the en... See more Proz.com cannot impose restrictions on translation topics based on personal likes or dislikes of one, several, or a group of users. Full stop. Any other consideration is futile, I think.
After all, the OP is proposing his list of things he personally dislikes. If a site like Proz.com "strongly discouraged" translating about these things, the same rule could be applied to everyone else (I think I can come up with quite a list of things we could do without in our world), and in the end we would only be entitled to translate about the birds and the bees (well, maybe not). ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member because it was not in line with site rule | | Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member because it was not in line with site rule | Sitiens (X)
Sweden
Local time: 12:25
English to Swedish
+ ...
| To each their own | Nov 8, 2012 |
I believe it is up to every translator (or linguist) to decide whether they want to deal with material like that or not.
For me, I could not imagine translating material that I know is fraudulent in nature, or that risks people's lives or welfare. This includes pyramid schemes, pseudoscientific practices that are obviously harmful or deceiving, gun advertisements, cigarette ads and similar. I don't want to feel like I'm enabling such events.
In the end, I think it's on ... See more I believe it is up to every translator (or linguist) to decide whether they want to deal with material like that or not.
For me, I could not imagine translating material that I know is fraudulent in nature, or that risks people's lives or welfare. This includes pyramid schemes, pseudoscientific practices that are obviously harmful or deceiving, gun advertisements, cigarette ads and similar. I don't want to feel like I'm enabling such events.
In the end, I think it's on a case-by-case basis. Is it obvious that the material will be used to harm people? Then I will refuse. Otherwise I will have to use my own judgment.
A very interesting topic! I know one of my translation teachers refuses to translate material that promotes war, weapons and addictive substances. It's a sound stance and one I have adopted. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Dan Dascalescu wrote: Live and let live? Perhaps you meant, live and let die? FYI, Steve Jobs died precisely because he insisted on an "alternative medicine" treatment instead of undergoing chemo.
How do you know the decision of this brilliant guy was not an informed one? Were you with him and saw the decision process? Would you like to refuse a patient his right to decide between the methods available and choose for him instead? I hoped our civilisation was beyond the stage of treating human beings as mindless objects to be moved around...
And yes, I saw with my own eyes people opting for a shorter life at a higher level of comfort rather than prolonging their existence at the price of comfort. I'd never dare interfere... but I did everything to provide them with a wealth of information to make their choice informed. In our job we do the same all the time - get the information across. Nothing more, nothing less.
| | | | | War and weapons | Nov 8, 2012 |
Sitiens wrote:
A very interesting topic! I know one of my translation teachers refuses to translate material that promotes war, weapons and addictive substances. It's a sound stance and one I have adopted.
The matter is really complicated, and therefore it should be decided by each individual, each with his/her own view on whether translating something has a potential to reduce human suffering as a whole or to increase it instead.
For instance, let's assume a translator decides never to translate about weapons. When the decision is about handguns, rifles, machine guns, hand grenades, swords, arrows, and bullets, it is very easy to decide since clearly these items have very little use other than killing people.
However, what if we talk about anti-tank mines/missiles or surface-to-air missiles? Clearly they kill people (the operators of the tanks or aircraft), but their use could prevent an attacker from causing much bigger losses among civilian population.
The matter becomes a bit more complicated if we talk about radars for instance: they can help you spot an enemy and protect your forces and thus the population from a potential attacker who is bound to enslave the population or ban democracy and human rights, but they can also be used to help a vicious enemy occupy a foreign land and do terrible things for a while.
The decision is indeed quite a difficult one, and that is why each one of us must decide with total freedom.
| | | | | Which reinforces Jenny's point | Nov 8, 2012 |
Sitiens wrote:
I know one of my translation teachers refuses to translate material that promotes war, weapons and addictive substances. It's a sound stance and one I have adopted.
But I suppose you'd translate it happily for the purposes of a scientific study or a court trial?
Where you are aware of the purpose of your work, the ethical choice on job refusal/acceptance is far easier. However, there is a myriad of those anonymous jobs from agencies where you cannot tell the job purpose. Too many people refusing, and another Breivik cannot be tried at court... Again, information is the key - this time, information available to us.
| | | | | I agree with Jenny | Nov 8, 2012 |
Jenny Forbes wrote:
I don't know about the particular text under discussion, but consider the possibility that the translation might be needed in order to investigate/prosecute/stop the practice concerned. Do you know what the client wants the translation for?
How can the police/courts deal with possible crimes/frauds unless they understand the content of documents, websites, etc. that may be criminal/fraudulent?
Jenny
I agree with Jenny
| | |
|
|
|
Sheila Wilson 
Spain
Local time: 11:25
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote: Sitiens wrote:
A very interesting topic! I know one of my translation teachers refuses to translate material that promotes war, weapons and addictive substances. It's a sound stance and one I have adopted. The matter becomes a bit more complicated if we talk about radars for instance: they can help you spot an enemy and protect your forces and thus the population from a potential attacker who is bound to enslave the population or ban democracy and human rights, but they can also be used to help a vicious enemy occupy a foreign land and do terrible things for a while.
Lasers are an even better example, IMO
| | | | Phil Hand
China
Local time: 18:25
Chinese to English
| An attempt to be helpful to Dan | Nov 8, 2012 |
Advertising standards.
Firstly, I agree with what a lot of people have said here: you don't necessarily know what a text will be used for, and I don't think that evil texts shouldn't be translated.
But, sometimes you know what's going on, and it's fishy. Sometimes you see a marketing text that someone is getting translated, and you know they are going to try to market their snake oil in a new territory. You can tell them: I happen to know that this marketing material vi... See more Advertising standards.
Firstly, I agree with what a lot of people have said here: you don't necessarily know what a text will be used for, and I don't think that evil texts shouldn't be translated.
But, sometimes you know what's going on, and it's fishy. Sometimes you see a marketing text that someone is getting translated, and you know they are going to try to market their snake oil in a new territory. You can tell them: I happen to know that this marketing material violates advertising standards regulations in territory X. You can dress it up as "look what a lovely helpful translator I am". And then if they actually go ahead and publish it anyway, you can make a complaint to the relevant advertising standards board.
I think it's important to distinguish between two things:
1) Your own personal ethics, which you apply to your business because you're you.
2) Your professional ethics, which you apply because you're a translator.
I think that where a text would break the law in its target language, it's a matter of professional ethics to tell the client so (if you know - we're not lawyers, and we can't be expected to know everything. But if you do know, and you don't say, that's a different issue.) Choosing to refuse texts that deal with certain topics but are not illegal is probably an issue of personal ethics. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Kay Denney
France
Local time: 12:25
French to English
| quackery and kids | Nov 9, 2012 |
Anna Sarah Krämer Fazendeiro wrote: The problem starts when it involves their children. These people will not vaccine their kids - they believe in this story that came up some years ago (and has been disproven since then) of vaccines causing autism. When their kids suffer of anything more serious (ear infections, tick bite, whatever) they will be very reluctant in letting them have antibiotics. They treat health issues that would otherwise be uncomplicated with homeopathic sugar pills till they do get complicated. And here is the point where I totally understand Dan. This does envolve practical ethics. Far from some barcharts posted online, there are these kids, I know some of them since they were born. What if one of these kids dies one day or stays with permanent damage because his parents were afraid to give an antibiotic? Could I still call those people my friends? Would I feel for not making more effort to convince them otherwise? I don't think that controlling the translation market is helpful. First - It cannot be controlled. Second - Where were the limits to be set? Censorship lurks, I wouldn't want that. I have come to realize that it is difficult to discuss with this kind of people. They believe in things because they WANT them to be true. They don't understand the scientific method - but they love pseudoscience (like Emotos beautiful water cristals and homeopathy) because it makes them believe a life based on love is possible. It is happy hippie paradise. Strange enough, the water never seems to remember all the toilets it went through. It only remembers what homeopathy wants it to remember. Maybe the only way to convince people is through carefully served information. Of course nobody wants to be called stupid - so one has to be careful. I believe that some TV shows like "Mythbusters" and similar things are great education materials - they are gross and silly in a way, but they do introduce kids to the scientific method in a fun and attractive way. It would have to be done in this way. They won't listen if we shout at them...
I think I have followed much the same path as Tomas (sorry I don't know where to find the accent), in terms of thinking I know it all then learning to tolerate those who don't know what I know.
And in view of my tolerant nature I feel I am entitled to say that I take exception to this kind of posting.
The French have a saying that "before I had principles, now I have children", which basically boils down to the fact that until you are actually in the throes of parenthood you don't know what parenting decisions you will make.
Anna, I have children and I had them vaccinated. They suffered, they had dangerously high levels of fever. My daughter even got bronchitis further to a whooping cough vaccine.
And then she got whooping cough a few years later.
So quite frankly if I could use Hermione's time turner I would choose not to vaccinate them.
Please don't judge your friends' parenting styles. Nobody's perfect, everybody has something they begrudge their parents. That doesn't make you an expert.
I use homeopathy. People tell me it's rubbish, but it works on me. I was always prepared to consider that it might just be psychological, in that I trust my doctor completely. But if I can be cured by taking little granules of sugar instead of wildly expensive poisons, surely that's a good thing?
Then my doctor told me about a vet using homeopathy too. Is it psychological for the sheep too?
Oh and I also agree with Jenny and Phil
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Ethics: how do you deal with harmful or misleading materials? | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
| | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
