1. Ethics and Computing CS 4100
Chapter 2
Ethics and Computing
CS 4100

2. 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

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

4. Chapter 2: Critical Thinking 2.1: What and Why

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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?

9. 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)

10. 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.

11. 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)

12. 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