The Guardian, UK reported that the man behind the pictures of the ‘lost tribe’ has admitted that the ‘lost tribe’ has in fact been known since 1902. He disclosed that he had described them as a lost tribe just found in order to stop logging around that area.
Is it justifiable, to be dishonest for a good cause?
“They are the amazing pictures that were beamed around the globe: a handful of warriors from an ‘undiscovered tribe‘ in the rainforest on the Brazilian-Peruvian border brandishing bows and arrows at the aircraft that photographed them.
Or so the story was told and sold. But it has now emerged that, far from being unknown, the tribe’s existence has been noted since 1910 and the mission to photograph them was undertaken in order to prove that ‘uncontacted’ tribes still existed in an area endangered by the menace of the logging industry.
The disclosures have been made by the man behind the pictures, José Carlos Meirelles, 61, one of the handful of sertanistas – experts on indigenous tribes – working for the Brazilian Indian Protection Agency, Funai, which is dedicated to searching out remote tribes and protecting them.” – Guardian, UK.
chariscrumbs said,
July 4, 2008 @ 8:08 pm
That man thought from the premise of consequentialism,.
PI am a non-consequentialist most of the time, at least I haven’t found I might be otherwise.
But the motivation that dorve this man to lie is worth noting.
The motivation is good.
politicssexreligion said,
July 7, 2008 @ 1:03 pm
Good angle to this – that of ‘consequentialism’. I must admit I don’t think of the consequences of what I do or think to do most if not all of the time.