Theoria De La Imagen

Image act theory

C. J. Reynolds
University of Tokyo
Engineering Building 6, Room 230
7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku Tokyo 113-8656, Japan Phone: +81 3-5841-6937
Fax: +81 3-5841-6952 carson@k2.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Abstract
Image Act Theory is an ethical theory that evaluates image manipulations in terms of social actions. In doing so,Image Act Theory borrows the approach of Austin's Speech Act Theory. Austin argued that certain utterances are preformative; that "in saying something, we do something." Likewise, Image Act Theory argues that when we change the way something appears, we perform a social action. An image manipulation may accuse, misrepresent, persuade and entertain depending upon the audience, illustrator, and whomis depicted. The benefit of this theory is that social actions are already amenable to analysis using a variety of ethical systems. This paper will survey historical
and recent examples of image manipulation, and provide commentary about the social action per- formed.

Keywords
image manipulation, ethics, speech act theory, social acts, communicationINTRODUCTION
When an image is manipulated and this manipulation is recognized, a social action is performed. To support this theory, this paper builds from Reinach’s ontology concerning social acts. In doing so the argument borrows heavily on the analysis of television by Lundsten (1998). Still the theory is both inspired and named after Austin’s Speech Theory (1975).

SOCIALACT THEORY
The ontological view proposed by Reinach distinguishes between physical objects and states of affairs that exist between them. The states of affairs are used to characterize obtainable states. More importantly states of affairs also serve as the domain of communicable information. Reinach uses this division of the world into objects and states of affairs as the basis fordescription of social acts.

Lundsten describes the Reinachian model as involving “four main characteristics in addition to the necessary physical expression which is needed because human beings are bound to the physical world: (1) social acts are directed at an intentional correlate, and (2) they are doings of somebody, furthermore, (3) they generate changes in the world but, in order to do this,(4) they need to be rec- ognised by a counterpart.” Reinach’s social acts were a precursor to structuralist models of commu- nication such as Jakobson’s analysis of verbal communication (1960).

As we shall see, image manipulations can be examined using this ontological stance. However, before proceeding it is also enlightening to consider speech act theory as another viewpoint for theanalysis of communication.

SPEECH ACT THEORY
Wittgenstein famously noted that “words are deeds.” In doing so he succinctly describes the main proposition of speech act theory. This is (to use Austin’s description) that “saying something does something.”

An oft-used example of speech act theory is the utterance “duck” to mean “look out!” In yelling the word duck to anotherEnglish-speaker, I utter a statement but also (if heard and understood) perform the social action of warning the listener.

Austin’s analysis decomposes speech utterances into different varieties of speech acts (Wilson,
2003):
• locutionary act: The meaning of the statement itself (e.g. saying "step back" is to tell someone to step back).
• illocutionary act: Thecontextual function of the act (e.g. by telling someone to step back, you are warning them of a falling object).
• perlocutionary act: The results of the act upon the listener (e.g. alerting the listener to the falling object, in the sense that the listener became knowledgeable of the impending dan- ger.

Austin’s work had influence on Searle (1970) who continued the line of...