Transcript 10_Ethics - Why Hood CS & IT?

Impact of Computers
on Society
9. ETHICS – Let’s talk about this early in the
semester
Empathy

Human beings are capable of standing outside
of themselves





humans can look at themselves
humans can look at others
humans can understand how others feel
Without empathy, others are merely the
means to one’s own ends
Empathy is the foundation of all ethics
Is an Ethical Sense Genetic?

There is some evidence that a sense of morality is
rooted in biology





Rhesus monkeys will starve rather than shock a fellow
rhesus to get food
Chimps will try to help drowning chimps
Baboons will sacrifice themselves for the good of the
group when confronted with a predator
Gorillas comforted a child who fell into their enclosure
Frans de Waal at Emory University: Living Links Center
Do monkeys have a sense of
fairness?

Two monkeys were paid unequally for equal work.
See what happens next... Franz de Waal, a
primatologist, ethologist, and professor of Primate
Behavior at Emory University, Atlanta, USA shows
what happens when two capuchin monkeys get
unequal pay for the same work...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo
Harvard Moral Sense Test



The Moral Sense Test is an exploration of how we as
humans make ethical decisions.
The MST is an attempt to identify the principles
behind ethical decisions made by people of different
ages, cultural and educational backgrounds,
religions, and philosophies.
Taking the MST is not required, but I think you will
find it enlightening—and perhaps disturbing.
Ethics is …

The study of doing the right thing for oneself and for
others









It’s not always clear what the “right” thing to do is
Do we “discover” ethics?
Do we “invent” ethics?
A set of rules?
A set of principles?
Societal?
Individual?
Immutable?
Adapted to a particular situation?
Three main ways of arguing ethics

Deontological approach

Utilitarian or teleological approach

“Natural Rights” approach
Deontology


Immanuel Kant (1780’s)
The Categorical Imperative



Decide as if you are deciding for all time and all
situations – in other words, as if you were God.
There is something intrinsic in a situation that
makes it right or wrong
People are never means to an end; they are
ends in and of themselves
An Extreme

For Kant, ethical rules are absolute

A categorical imperative would denote an absolute, unconditional
requirement that exerts its authority in all circumstances, and is both
required and justified as an end in itself. — Wikipedia

“In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others.
In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so.”

“Do what is right, though the world may perish.”

—Immanuel Kant
Utilitarianism, Teleology,
Consequentialism

John Stuart Mill (1860’s) and Jeremy Bentham (c.
1800)






(Aside: Where is Jeremy Bentham now?)
The goal is to increase “happiness” or “utility”
Compare with Epicurean philosophy
Contrast with hedonism
A decision is based on a “calculation” of utility,
based on general guidelines
How do you calculate?
Natural Rights





John Locke (late 1600’s)
Derive your principles from human nature – from
what people would naturally do if not interfered with
People have exclusive rights to themselves and to the
fruits of their labor.
Rules against killing, stealing, deception are implicit
in this.
Problem: Lord of the Flies (Golding)
Fundamental Similarities




Deontology is based on given fundamental
principles, such as the Ten Commandments.
Teleology is based on a single given
fundamental: Seek the greatest “happiness”
(utility) for the greatest number.
In a sense both Deontological and
Teleological arguments boil down to the
Golden Rule – Do Unto Others
But…
A Clarification


Kant would not agree that the Categorical Imperative
and the Golden Rule are synonymous
The Categorical Imperative is universal whereas the
Golden Rule is tied to situations




A criminal might argue that it is all right to steal because
he expects others to steal from him
One might refuse to donate to charity on the grounds that
he himself does not wish to be the recipient of charity
On similar grounds one could “justify” cheating, lying,
breaking promises
All of the above would remain immoral under the
Categorical Imperative because of its universality
Negative Rights

Negative Rights, or liberties, are rights to act
peacefully without interference.



The right to worship as you please
The right to travel freely
Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure
Positive Rights

Positive Rights, or claim-rights, are rights that
impose an obligation on some people to
provide certain things for others.



FAPE: free, appropriate, public education
A court-appointed defense lawyer or an
interpreter
Medicare and Medicaid
Where do most Americans get their
values?




Family
Community
Religious training or belief
Role models



Pop culture
High culture
Laws and codes of conduct
Three Basic Documents

Declaration of Independence


United States Constitution


We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are
created equal and that they are endowed by their Creator
with unalienable rights
The Bill of Rights spells out what some of those
unalienable rights are
Bible


Ten Commandments
Golden Rule
Ethical Dilemmas





Situations are rarely black and white
Harm to some people may be the result of doing the
right thing
Sometimes difficult to draw the line between our
own personal preferences and what is right or wrong
– obscene speech, for example.
Ethics can get mixed up with politics and religion,
too.
Recommended reading from the NY Times: Is There
an Innate Moral Sense?—Five Moral Senses
Sincerety

Sincerely held convictions may be invalid.

The Devil is sincere . . .

but he is sincerely wrong!

Denton Wayside Chapel
Harm



Harm does not necessarily mean that an
action is unethical.
In Henrik Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People a
scientist discovers that a town’s lucrative
healing springs actually present a serious
health hazard.
The townspeople refuse to believe him.
Ends versus Means


It is usually possible to achieve a goal by
more than one means.
If you are feeling uneasy, is it the goal that is
questionable or the means of achieving the
goal that is questionable?
Personal Preference and Prejudice

It is sometimes difficult to distinguish
between our personal preferences—or
prejudices—and what is ethical.

Rev. Albert T. Mollegen—growing up in
Mississippi in the 1930’s
Law and Ethics


Usually the law coincides with what is ethical.
Sometimes, however, law and ethics do not
agree


It is legal to foreclose on a home, but is it ethical?
There is no simple answer to this one…
An Example Situation

Janet is a member of the MegaWare sales
force. She has become aware that her
colleague Brad has been promising customers
far more than the software is capable of
delivering. What should she do?
Should Janet …










Keep her mouth shut because she has done nothing
wrong?
Have a frank discussion with Brad?
Drop an anonymous “hint” in the suggestion box?
Start a rumor?
Tell her supervisor?
Tell upper management?
Go to the news media?
Find another job?
Or … ?
Mike McQueary at Penn State
Complicating Factors
Imagine that…






The software is part of a video game
Instead, the software is part of an air traffic control module
Janet’s husband has a rare blood disorder which has resulted
in huge medical bills
Janet is not absolutely certain Brad’s claims will result in
damage to equipment
Janet is not absolutely certain Brad’s claims will result in
harm to passengers
Remember ENRON
There is no way to avoid harm to
someone in this situation





Brad has already been compromised
Janet could be branded a troublemaker or lose her job
The employer could lose money
Shareholder investments could lose value
What about customers?




Financial loss
Lawsuits
End users, passengers, the general public could be hurt
Hopefully, the damage will be limited to Brad since he was
responsible for the original exaggeration and deception.
An Ethics Exercise


Choose something in society that you think is wrong.
Then try to determine…






Exactly what is wrong
Who is affected?
Why it is wrong?
Would it perhaps be OK in another setting?
Try arguing the opposing point of view.
Make a list of the principles upon which your
determination of wrong is based