CS3001T OPIC – I NTRODUCTION TO E THICS

W HAT IS E THICS ? Ethics is the philosophical study of morality, a rational examination into people’s moral beliefs and behavior It seeks to address questions such as  “What do people think is right?”  “What does ‘do the right thing’ mean?”  “How should people act?”  “What rules or laws should we have?”

W HAT IS E THICS ( CONT.) Goal: To help people to make moral decisions. It assumes that people are rational and free to choose how they will act. It can be used to describe how people do act or how people should act.

B UT... Negative Arguments: There are no universal norms of right and wrong. Ethical debates are disagreeable and pointless. Each person may decide right and wrong for himself or herself: “What’s right for you may not be right for me” We can disagree on moral issues

W HY S TUDY E THICS ? Positive Arguments: Not everyone can do what they want – Must respect other people and their values. “Common wisdom” not always adequate; need to be prepared to face future ethical decisions. Everybody shares the “core values” of life. Ethics provides bases to make best rational decisions.

E THICAL T HEORIES Many of them: Approximately 2,000 years of organized literature concerned with ethics. Many famous philosophers contributed: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Kant, etc.

A F EW E THICAL S YSTEMS Kantianism Utilitarianism Ethical Egoism Subjective Relativism Cultural Relativism Social Contract Theory Divine Command Theory

K ANTIANISM Attributed to Immanuel Kant ( ). Kant’s conclusion is that the only thing in the world that can be called good without qualification is a good will. Founded on the view that all people are fundamentally rational beings, and can derive moral rules from the logic of the situation and act according to the rules. Kant’s Criteria: Can the rule be universally applied to everyone? Does the rule treat people as ends, not means?

S CENARIO Carla is a single mother who is working hard to complete her college education while taking care of her daughter. Carla has a full-time job and is taking two evening courses per semester. If she can pass both courses this semester, she will graduate. She knows her child will benefit if she can spend more time at home. One of her required classes is modern European history. In addition to the midterm and final examinations, the professor assigns four lengthy reports,

S CENARIO which is far more than the usual amount of work required for a single class. Students must submit all four reports in order to pass the class. Carla earns an “A” on each of her first three reports. At the end of the term, she is required to put in a lot of overtime where she works. She simply does not have time to research and write the final report. Carla uses the Web to identify a company that sells term papers. She purchases a report from the company and submits it as her own work. Was Carla’s action morally justifiable?

C RITIQUES ON K ANTIANISM Arguments For: Rational Produces universal moral guidelines Treats all persons as moral equals Arguments Against: It allows no exceptions to moral rules Sometimes no rule adequately characterizes an action There is no way to resolve a conflict between rules

U TILITARIANISM Utilitarianism decides whether an act or rule is "right" depending on whether it results in the increase of the aggregate “happiness” (or “utilities”). There are two types for utilitarianism: Act utilitarianism Rule utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism : is the ethical theory that an action is good if its net effect (over all affected beings) is to produce more happiness than unhappiness. o Rule utilitarianism: is the ethical theory that holds that we ought to adopt those moral rules which, if followed by everyone, will lead to the greatest increase in total happiness. Hence, a rule utilitarian applies the Principle of Utility to moral rules, while an act utilitarian applies the Principle of Utility to individual moral actions.

C OMPARE !!! Kantianismutilitarianism

E XAMPLE Problem: State wants to replace a curvy stretch of highway: 150 houses would have to be removed Some wildlife habitat would be destroyed Analysis: Costs: $31 million (compensation for homeowners and wildlife habitat, plus construction cost) Benefits: $39 million savings in driving costs Conclusion: Benefits exceed costs. It’s a good action.

S CENARIO In August 2003, the Blaster worm infected many computers running the Windows 2000, Windows NT, and Windows XP operating systems. The Blaster worm caused computers it infected to reboot every few minutes. Soon, another worm was exploiting the same security hole in Windows to spread through the Internet. However, the purpose of the new worm, named Nachi, was benevolent. Since Nachi took advantage of the same security hole as Blaster, it could not infect computers that were immune to the Blaster worm. Once Nachi gained access to a computer with the security hole, it located and destroyed copies of the Blaster worm. It also automatically downloaded from Microsoft a patch to the operating system software that would fix the security problem. Finally, it used the computer as a launching pad to seek out other Windows PCs with the security hole.

Was the action of the person who released the Nachi worm morally right or wrong? Proposed Rule: “If I can write a helpful worm that removes a harmful worm from infected computers and shields them from future attacks, I should do so.”

E XAMPLE 2 E VALUATION Who would benefit: People who do not keep their systems updated Who would be harmed People who use networks People who’s computers are invaded by buggy antiworms System administrators Conclusion: Harm outweighs benefits. The action is wrong.

C RITIQUES ON U TILITARIANISM Arguments For: Focuses on practical “goodness” Comprehensive; can include exceptional situations Arguments Against: Requires aggregating all consequences on a single scale Does not recognize or respect individual rights. (A minority group could be sacrificed for the greater happiness of the majority.)

S UBJECTIVE R ELATIVISM The idea: o Relativism is the theory that there are no universal moral norms of right and wrong. According to this theory, different individuals or groups of people can have completely opposite views of a moral problem, and both can be right. o Subjective relativism holds that each person decides right and wrong for himself or herself.

S UBJECTIVE R ELATIVISM Arguments for: Gives everyone a right to define “goodness”. Eliminates all further moral debate. Arguments against: No distinction between doing what is “right” and doing whatever you want. We can never judge the acts of another person. Ethics is not based on reason or principle.

C ULTURAL R ELATIVISM Definition: Cultural relativism is the ethical theory that the meaning of “right” and “wrong” rests with a society’s actual moral guidelines. These guidelines vary from place to place and from time to time.

C ULTURAL R ELATIVISM Arguments For: Different social contexts demand different moral guidelines. Arguments Against: Doesn’t explain how moral guidelines are determined. Provides no way out for cultures in conflict. Because many practices are acceptable does not mean any cultural practice is acceptable.

E THICAL E GOISM The Idea: Each person acts out of self-interest. Focus on your long-term best interest.

E THICAL E GOISM Arguments For: Most people naturally act in their own self-interest. Society as a whole benefits when each individual puts self-interest first.

Arguments Against: Many people do not act in their own long- term best interest. Examples… Other ethical systems might save us from our ourselves. Some people tend to gain power. They use their power to get more power.

S OCIAL C ONTRACT T HEORY Individuals implicitly accept a “Social Contract”, on the condition that others follow the rules as well. Individuals act within a sphere of freedom, as long as the set of rules are respected. The “social contract” rules are established simply to enable everyone the benefits of social living. They center on respecting natural rights to life, liberty, and property.

K INDS OF R IGHTS According to John Locke (1632–1704), there are three natural rights: life, liberty, and property. Other Classifications: Negative Rights (Liberties) – The right to act without interference. ???? Positive Rights (Claim-Rights) – ?????

C RITIQUES ON S OCIAL C ONTRACT T HEORY Arguments For: Framed in the language of rights. Provides clear analysis of certain government actions. E.g. “Those who do not follow the rules will be punished.” Arguments Against: Conflicting rights problem

D IVINE C OMMAND T HEORY Based on the idea that good actions are those aligned with the will of God and bad actions are those contrary to the will of God. God’s will has been revealed to us — We can use the holy books as moral decision- making guides. Judaism: Torah Christianity: Bible Islam: Koran

Arguments For: God is all-good, all-knowing, all- powerful We’d better do what he says! God’s authority is higher than human- made ethical system We live in a multicultural and there are secular societies. The holy books don’t apply to modern technological issues

D ISCUSSION Q UESTIONS What are some examples of contemporary technology issues for which our society’s moral guidelines seem to be nonexistent or unclear? ( Ethical vs Legal) Can you give examples where an action may be legal but unethical, or vise versa? Do (or should) organizations have ethics? If so, who make them? And who are affected — employees? customers? the society?

D ISCUSSION Q UESTIONS Which of the following rights should be considered legitimate positive rights by our society? The right to a minimum standard of living The right to housing The right to health care The right to education The right to a paying job The right to two months of vacation each year

D ISCUSSION Q UESTIONS Examples of conflicts between positive rights of one person and negative rights of another person.