In scientific conservation, decisions are made on objective grounds and following objective criteria: meanings, or subjective feelings or preferences should have no role in its development. As a consequence, no preferred objects should exist, and therefore, none should be treated in any special manner. Since scientific conservation revolves around material and physical features, and not around values, value-based judgements are disregarded as unscientific. Thus, every conserved object should be given the same importance, and a 'single standard' should be applied to its conservation. [...] In contrast, contemporary ethics is far more flexible, calling for what could be called 'adaptive ethics'. Adaptive ethics acknowledge that a conservation process might be performed for very different reasons and under very different circumstances. Material circumstances (such as the object's material components or the object's environment) do indeed play a role. However, subjective factors are usually more relevant, as they lie at the core of the activity. These factors are varied, and involve at least two crucial aspects: a) The meanings or ('functions' or 'values') the object has for the affected people; b) The decision-maker's willingness to allocate resources to the conservation process. These factors are not the only variables that can have an influence on a conservation work, but they are the most important ones, as they are both ever-present and fundamental in ethical and technical decision-making.
Munoz Vinas, 2005, p. 202 - 203
|
