I think you could incorporate utilitarianism into your paper. For example, you can argue that continuing on someone's digital legacy can be an example of maximizing happiness for the masses because it brings them nostalgic or happy memories of that person.
This is a truly important and timely topic. You did an excellent job presenting both sides of the argument in a balanced and thoughtful way. The way you explored the ethical questions around posthumous digital representation, especially in the case of 2Pac, challenged how we think about agency after death. Your presentation sparked a thought-provoking discussion on the relationship between agency and identity and raised meaningful questions about how we honor or reconstruct a person’s legacy in the digital age.
Your topic is interesting, making me think of a tricky question. You brought up the idea of agency when talking about the 2Pac exhibit, but I wonder if it makes sense to think about whether someone still has agency after they’ve passed away. If a person doesn’t retain any agency after death, then maybe the whole conversation about how we use their digital legacy changes completely.
I really liked this topic, which has always been my question too. You clearly provided your stand point, especially when you responded to a classmate's question by stating that if you deceased you would not want people to make up things or videos you did not do during lifetime. You also mentioned how intention of doing specific behaviors that's so called "remembering" (such as making up music with the deceased voice )of the deceased is important.
I think you could incorporate utilitarianism into your paper. For example, you can argue that continuing on someone's digital legacy can be an example of maximizing happiness for the masses because it brings them nostalgic or happy memories of that person.
This is a truly important and timely topic. You did an excellent job presenting both sides of the argument in a balanced and thoughtful way. The way you explored the ethical questions around posthumous digital representation, especially in the case of 2Pac, challenged how we think about agency after death. Your presentation sparked a thought-provoking discussion on the relationship between agency and identity and raised meaningful questions about how we honor or reconstruct a person’s legacy in the digital age.
Your topic is interesting, making me think of a tricky question. You brought up the idea of agency when talking about the 2Pac exhibit, but I wonder if it makes sense to think about whether someone still has agency after they’ve passed away. If a person doesn’t retain any agency after death, then maybe the whole conversation about how we use their digital legacy changes completely.
I really liked this topic, which has always been my question too. You clearly provided your stand point, especially when you responded to a classmate's question by stating that if you deceased you would not want people to make up things or videos you did not do during lifetime. You also mentioned how intention of doing specific behaviors that's so called "remembering" (such as making up music with the deceased voice )of the deceased is important.