Ethics and Computing CS 4100 Chapter 2 Ethics and Computing CS 4100

First, Remember: Have high ethical standards Boldly live up to those standards Serve a larger purpose Suspend initial reaction (think critically) Imagine yourself in the case studies

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.1 What and Why 2.2 Categories of Reasoning 2.3 Example 2.4 Case Study

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.1: What and Why

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.1: What and Why 2.2: Reasoning Ability and desire to ask the right questions Suggested questions on page 21 Argument A line of reasoning leading to a conclusion NOT: A heated disagreement Valid argument has 3 parts True premises Relevant premises Sufficient premises Valid argument is like a “word ladder” Pant > rant > raft > rift > lift >> life

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.2: Reasoning 9 common problems in reasoning Ambiguity Circularity False assumptions Insufficient evidence Misidentified causation Irrelevant premises Appeals (to emotion/authority/loyalty/etc.) Diversion Incorrect deductive inference

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.2: Reasoning Ambiguity Computer comparison Wiretaps “I’ve never seen that one fail.” “Joe was never caught using drugs at work.” Circular argument (begging the question) One of the premises is the conclusion in disguise! Invention Fundraiser

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.2: Reasoning Unwarranted Assumptions Whole and parts don’t share properties Team of ace programmers Company of products, tech. staff, admin staff, sales staff What is, ought to be Look-and-feel copyrights What is new must be better Windows Me Either-or Split the difference 2 weeks + 0 weeks / 2 = 1 week more of testing Sum of legible amounts = a negligible amount Poor analogies Good at higher level means good at deeper level?

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.2: Reasoning Missing Evidence Insufficient sample size Speculation regarding alternative Be wary: Lack of evidence Numeric values of vague concepts Misidentified Causation Timing is necessary but NOT sufficient Sufficient implies necessary, but not other way Oversimplifying/Overdramatizing a cause Domino fallacy (also called “slippery slope”) Gambler’s fallacy (probability of independent events)

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.2: Reasoning Irrelevant Premises Justifying/rationalizing a decision using reasons only chosen to justify the decision Attacking someone’s motiviation Attacking a person’s character (ad hominem) “Others (maybe even you) do it” Appeals No fact, an attempt to “guilt” someone Emotion, authority, loyalty, patriotism, prevailing opinion, flattery, intimidation, tradition, etc.

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.2: Reasoning Diversions “Straw person” “Red herring” Trivial objections Humor Ridicule Incorrect Deductive Inference Categorical syllogisms (membership of objects in groups) Hypothetical reasoning (if X then Y and X, thus Y) Denying the antecedent (if X then Y and not X, thus not Y) Affirming the consequent (if X then Y and Y, thus X)

Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.3: Example Harvard Dean Case Study The “knee jerk” reaction Right to privacy A more informed analysis “Public-ness” details Variations of situation Other stake holders News media, Harvard president Examples of critical thinking lapses Dershowitz, ACLU, Medical doctor analogy