Please choose from the list of thinking partners to the left
Remember: Everything the GPT Thinking Partners say is made up!
Edit the AI results before you hit Start Conversation. Revise the message to make it
helpful
(to other readers),
honest
(about any facts) and
harmless
(avoiding biases).
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit?
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Resubmission
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit?
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
George Ocampo(Apr 14 2016 5:53PM):
Moral Anarchy
more
This statement rings very clearly to what was being seen in Pylon and A Private Life of Michael Foot. The idea that a journalist must work in a state of moral anarchy suggests that he must work in such a way that he defies any sense of authority or order for the sake of delivering a true, honest, and interesting story. This can be seen in Pylon through the journalist’s efforts despite his editor, and in Michael Foot’s biography when he wanted his better characteristics to be highlighted.
student Venetia Persaud(May 05 2016 2:25PM):
I agree with George's point of view because in some cases in order for a journalist to deliver a truthful story he needs to defy the rules and restrictions.
I agree with George in the sense that this statement does remind me of the way that the journalists in both Pylon and A Private Life of Michael Foot act. I think the journalists in all three stories would agree that getting the story ranks above all else and that doing whatever it takes to get the story is the job of a journalist, which can only be done in this state of moral anarchy.
Ayannah Woods(May 06 2016 7:59AM):
"Whatever it takes" will always serve conflict between the writer and the subject. There will always be some bounds of restriction placed upon the writer that will hinder their piece.
Ayannah Woods(May 13 2016 9:23AM):
Bounds of restriction would be topics that the subject may not want to indulge in or may not want included in the piece. This would make it difficult for the writer to produce an authentic work.
Ayannah Woods(May 14 2016 2:21PM):
Maybe I should say the "restrictions" instead are what may hold back the writer from including everything in their story.
student Venetia Persaud(May 17 2016 1:03PM):
In some situations, I think restrictions are necessary and should be taken seriously regardless of the writer's dislike for those restrictions.
Well, I think the “whatever it takes” depends on the journalist and his moral compass. I think that there is an end line that journalists will not cross but where that line is depends on the person and how he justifies it to himself because at the end of the day, he’s the one that has to live with his decisions. For me personally, I wouldn’t think that the ends justify the means.
Elvira Amparo De La Cruz(Apr 15 2016 5:28PM):
in Pylon and A Private Life of Michael Foot this statement portrays a very true idea
[Edited]more
My view of moral anarchy consist of not considering any upper authorities and doing what they believe is right according to their values. In pylon, the journalist acknowledges the editor but at the same time does what he has to do, what he felt was going to be of interest and what he felt was important. In Foot, Michael foot despairingly attempted to only preview the good, but the journalist wanted more. Both journalist understood and foresaw what they were getting them selves into, but they continued purposefully, at their own will.
Carl Rollyson(Apr 16 2016 4:34AM):
Moral anarchy has nothing with doing what you believe is right. Moral anarchy suggests disorder. I don't think you grasp what is said here.
The job of a journalist is doing the best work to deliver the most truthful story to his audiences; sometime even work in a state of moral anarchy. In the reading of Pylon and A Private Life of Michael Foot, this statement was often informed very clearly. No matter the it’s the journalist in Pylon or the biography in Michaels, they would try different method to deliver the most truthful information.
From my understanding, moral anarchy meant not morally appropriate behavior. As the journalist tried to find out the truth from the subject, he might do something or ask some questions that are not morally appropriate. But as the job of a journalist, it is understandable as long as he provides the most truthful story in the writing.
Mr. Saveen Wijebandara(May 11 2016 10:41PM):
moral anarchy is a mess.
more
The words, “deliberately induced” resonate more than “moral anarchy.” Based on the two books, the statement signifies the ability of a journalist to report, to get the facts, to discern the viability. Also, moral anarchy refers to the fact that, one cannot work with one view, there needs to be some mess in the creative process as the piece of work is being produced.
Mr. Itamar Hematian(May 15 2016 10:15AM):
The statement is simple truth. Morals are not part of the job when it comes to biographic research. Biographers, by definition, are supposed to report the whole, objective view of the subject, and sometimes that means breaking the rules.
Moral anarchy is the difference between writing fact or fiction. The problem is that the journalist may not realize when fact has ended and fiction is taking hold and controlling it. Certain deterrents could alleviate that problem but bring about others like not, getting the 360 degree picture.
Omer Seman(May 20 2016 10:54PM):
Internal conflict
more
For me, the term “moral anarchy” evokes an internal conflict between a thirst for the true narrative you wish to discover and share and a respect for boundaries and rules. In Pylon, the editor and reporter personify this struggle, with the authoritative figure attempting to contain the creative, rebellious storyteller.
In Michael Foot’s biography, he is so driven to maintain order as he sees it that instead of sabotaging the biography, he injects it with another layer of complexity and makes the biographer’s depiction of him all the more truer. The experience biographer didn’t wrestle with guilt because he showed us all he could.
Desktop/Laptop: double-click any text, highlight a section of an image, or add a comment while a video is playing to start a new conversation. Tablet/Phone: single click then click on the "Start One" link (look right or below).
Click "Reply" on a comment to join the conversation.
icons on the left to see existing comments.
0 General Document comments
0 Sentence and Paragraph comments
0 Image and Video comments
General Document Comments 0
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
This statement rings very clearly to what was being seen in Pylon and A Private Life of Michael Foot. The idea that a journalist must work in a state of moral anarchy suggests that he must work in such a way that he defies any sense of authority or order for the sake of delivering a true, honest, and interesting story. This can be seen in Pylon through the journalist’s efforts despite his editor, and in Michael Foot’s biography when he wanted his better characteristics to be highlighted.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
I agree with George in the sense that this statement does remind me of the way that the journalists in both Pylon and A Private Life of Michael Foot act. I think the journalists in all three stories would agree that getting the story ranks above all else and that doing whatever it takes to get the story is the job of a journalist, which can only be done in this state of moral anarchy.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Well, I think the “whatever it takes” depends on the journalist and his moral compass. I think that there is an end line that journalists will not cross but where that line is depends on the person and how he justifies it to himself because at the end of the day, he’s the one that has to live with his decisions. For me personally, I wouldn’t think that the ends justify the means.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
New Conversation
My view of moral anarchy consist of not considering any upper authorities and doing what they believe is right according to their values. In pylon, the journalist acknowledges the editor but at the same time does what he has to do, what he felt was going to be of interest and what he felt was important. In Foot, Michael foot despairingly attempted to only preview the good, but the journalist wanted more. Both journalist understood and foresaw what they were getting them selves into, but they continued purposefully, at their own will.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
I guess im trying to say is that the journalist does what he / she wants. therefore that is considered “right” to them
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
The job of a journalist is doing the best work to deliver the most truthful story to his audiences; sometime even work in a state of moral anarchy. In the reading of Pylon and A Private Life of Michael Foot, this statement was often informed very clearly. No matter the it’s the journalist in Pylon or the biography in Michaels, they would try different method to deliver the most truthful information.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
From my understanding, moral anarchy meant not morally appropriate behavior. As the journalist tried to find out the truth from the subject, he might do something or ask some questions that are not morally appropriate. But as the job of a journalist, it is understandable as long as he provides the most truthful story in the writing.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
Hide Thread Detail
does it meant no limits or unscrupulous behavior？
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
The words, “deliberately induced” resonate more than “moral anarchy.” Based on the two books, the statement signifies the ability of a journalist to report, to get the facts, to discern the viability. Also, moral anarchy refers to the fact that, one cannot work with one view, there needs to be some mess in the creative process as the piece of work is being produced.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment Hide Thread Detail
New Conversation
New Conversation
Moral anarchy is the difference between writing fact or fiction. The problem is that the journalist may not realize when fact has ended and fiction is taking hold and controlling it. Certain deterrents could alleviate that problem but bring about others like not, getting the 360 degree picture.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment
For me, the term “moral anarchy” evokes an internal conflict between a thirst for the true narrative you wish to discover and share and a respect for boundaries and rules. In Pylon, the editor and reporter personify this struggle, with the authoritative figure attempting to contain the creative, rebellious storyteller.
In Michael Foot’s biography, he is so driven to maintain order as he sees it that instead of sabotaging the biography, he injects it with another layer of complexity and makes the biographer’s depiction of him all the more truer. The experience biographer didn’t wrestle with guilt because he showed us all he could.
New Conversation
Hide Full Comment