Transcript Chapter 1 - Department of Computer Science & Information

Chapter 1
Cybertechnology, Ethical Concepts,
and Methodological Frameworks:
An Introduction to Cyberethics
Introduction
Terms
• Ethics: The practice of making a principled
choice between right and wrong
• Ethical principles: ideas of behavior that are
commonly acceptable to society
• Computer ethics: one author (introductory
lectures) says that these are no different than
regular ethics – we have ethical situations in
which computers are involved
Terms(2)
• Cyberethics: the field of applied ethics
that examines moral, legal, and social
issues in the development and use of
cybertechnology
• Cybertechnology: a broad spectrum of
technologies that range from standalone computers to the cluster of
networked computing, informaiton, and
communication technologies
Terms (3)
• Computer ethics: might suggest study of
ethical issues associated primarily with
computing machines or the computing
profession (I may still slip and use this term
occasionally)
• Cyberethics better captures broad range of
ethical issues
• Other authors have referred to this field of
study as Internet ethics or information ethics
but again, these are either to broad or not
specific enough
Computer Ethics/Cyberethics
Evolution
• First three readings in text are by three
pioneers in the field: Terrell Bynum,
Deborah Johnson, and James Moor.
– We’ll cover the article by Bynum and Moor
– Bynum’s describes the development of the
field from the 40’s and 50’s to the present
time
Ethics and Cyberethics
(Same or Different)
• Has cybertechnology introduced any new
moral issues?
• This question is still debated in cyberethics
literature
• Some believe that essentially there is
nothing new or special about ethical issues
associated with computers and
cybyertechnology
– Crime is crime, privacy violations are privacy
violations
Same or Different (2)
• Others believe computers have
generated unique ethical issues that
would not exist without
cybertechnology
• Some situations are completely unique
and have no non-computer parallel
• Counting errors, arithmetic overflow
that causes computer systems to crash
Some “Moor”
• In Moor’s article we learn that computers are
“logically malleable”
• They can be molded to many tasks
• Unlike your refrigerator or microwave
• Just change the SW program
• These capabilities can generate voids or
vacuums in laws and social policies
• Vacuums in our conceptual frameworks –
ability to understand and discuss obscure
issues that emerge due to technology –
“conceptual muddles”
More from “Moor”
• An adequate computer ethics
methodology consists of four steps:
– Identify any policy vacuums that arise;
– Clarify any conceptual muddles that also
arise
– Revise existing social policies or, if
necessary, formulate new policies; and
– Justify the revised or the newly formulated
social policies
Moor’s Suggestion
• In later work, he argues that a separate
field of computer ethics is needed
because ordinary ethics (routine ethics)
cannot sufficiently deal with many of
the ethical issues generated by
computing technology
• Many philosophers working in
computer ethics consider this
approach the standard methodology
Ethical Theory
• Ethical theories based on criteria of
consequences or duty generally receive the
most attention in the philosophical literature
• Utiliarianism – a form of consequentialist
ethical theory, generally utilitarians are
interested in advancing only those social
policies that produce the greatest good
(social utility) for the greatest number of
individuals
Ethical Theory (2)
• Deontological (duty based) ethical theories reject the
view that consequences can be used as an
appropriate criterion
• They point out a policy may yield desirable
consequences for the greatest number of people and
still be a morally unacceptable policy
• For Deontologists, a policy is morally acceptable
only if everyone affected by that policy is respected
as an individual and is given equal consideration
• Shouldn’t have majority of individuals affected
favorably at the expense of the minority
• Deontologists argue that we have a moral duty to
ensure that each individual is treated accordingly
Criticisms
• Utilitarian critics argue that because utilitarians are
so preoccupied w/ promoting happiness for the
majority they ignore the importance of justice and
fairness for each individual
• Deontologists often accused of ignoring the
importance of happiness and overall social utility,
because they focus exclusively on the primacy of
notions such as duty, autonomy, rights, and respect
for each individual.
• Philosophers have had a hard time synthesizing
these theories in a way that is both coherent and
consistent