Computers in Society
Computers in Society CSI 3101
Popular in Course
verified elite notetaker
Popular in ComputerScienence
This 60 page Class Notes was uploaded by Melvin Bednar on Saturday October 3, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to CSI 3101 at Baylor University taught by Paul Grabow in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 79 views. For similar materials see /class/217931/csi-3101-baylor-university in ComputerScienence at Baylor University.
Reviews for Computers in Society
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 10/03/15
Professional Ethics Dr Paul C Grabow Baylor University FrurnJuhrisuri D o Computer Ethics 3m Ed Prenticerl lall 2mm immm 1 1 0252005 Why professional ethics 0 Professional roles and relationships Constrain actions v Facilitate actions 0 We cannot understand ethical aspects if situations are only viewed from an individual standpoint 0 Professional roles often carry i Special rights v Special responsibilities mamm 2 Strongly Differentiated SD Professions o Gives roleholder Powers andor responsibilities that are exceptions to ordinary morali y 0 Examples i Medical doctors v Licensed engineers o Requires special ethical analysis 0 Most occupations are not strongly differentiated immm 1 0252005 ls computer professional SD 0N0 o Do not acquire special power or privilege by being a computer professional o You acquire any special power or privilege by being an employee immm How does context affect o Employment roles include at Obligations to clients andor employer 0 Businesses often 4 Exist in highly competitive environment Constrained by law in variety of ways 0 This context affects computer professionals 1 Powers 4 Responsibilities mama Ef cacy of Professionals 0 Efficacy power to affect the world o Professionals have Some skill or knowledge Ability to produce product or service 0 Produce or service 1 Can affect the world immm 1 0252005 Efficacy of Professionals cont 0 Because professionals are efficacious 1 They bear special responsibility 0 Consequently Not sufficient to think of professionals simply as individuals in complex situations 1 Moral analysis different than for lay persons lmmm Characteristics of Professions Mastery of special knowledge andor skill Autonomy Formal organization Code ofethics Social function lmmm Professional Recognition 0 Must demonstrate that an activity is dangerous for just anyone to do 0 Must convince public that lay people cannotjudge Who is properly trained 0 Must regulate itself 0 le demonstrate that it is worthy of a monopoly lmmm 1 0252005 Professional Recognition cont o Monopoly of control gives profession 1 Collective autonomy o Constitutes a social contract Between society and profession Each side takes responsibility in exchange for something it perceives to be good mamm 1 11 ls computing a profession Mastery of special knowledge andor skill o widely accepted body of knowledge Autonomy Varying degrees of autonomy Formal organization Not like the AMA but ACM amp IEEECS Code of ethics ACM and IEEE Social function Not itselfa social Jnction mamm 1 1 Sothare Engineering 0 Educational requirement ie curricula 1 Software Engineering 2004 curriculum guidelines Joint committee of ACM amp IEEECS 0 Licensing 11 No real agreement Texas example software engineering defined as engineering mamm 1 2 1 0252005 Professional Relationships EmployerEmployee ClientProfessional SocietyProfessional ProfessionalProfessional mamm 1 EmployerEmployee o Moral foundation contractual 0 Both exercise their autonomy in consenting or not consenting to the contract 0 Each has obligations to the other not all of which are spelled out in the contract mama Loyalty o Potentially bad Invites unfairness Eschews reliance on good reasons Invites irresponsibility o Potentially good Necessary for close relationships eg parenting and friendships mamm 1 0252005 2 ClientProfessional o Moral foundation contractual 0 Reality A Disparity in knowledge or expertise between two parties A Client seeks professionals special knowledge A Client must trust professional for something that the client does not really understand immm 1 1 2 ClientProfessional cont 0 Agency Model Professional is agent Implements what client requests A What is the problem with this model 0 Paternalistic Model 1 Client transfers all authority to professional 1 Professional acts in interests of client 1 What is the problem here mamm 1 1 2 ClientProfessional cont o Fiduciary Model 1 lmplies trust Both parties must trust each other A Client must trust professional to use knowledge wisely A Professional must trust client to give relevant information and to listen to professional advice immm 1 1 3 SocietyProfessional o Shaped by law 0 Can be understood as a social contract o Society gives professionals Right to practice 0 Professional provides society Expertise immm 1 s 1 0252005 Knowledge amp Responsibility o Correlation may be based on at Principle of ordinary morality Alpern 1983 o Edict do no harm a fundamental principle Whenever one is in a position to contribute to greater harm or when one is in a position to play a more critical part in producing harm than is another person one must exercise greater care to avoid so doing n 394 I ILM39J39JI L my I mamm 2n 4 ProfessionalProfessional 0 Both good and bad 0 Bad Loyalty of one professional to another ma simply bolster selfinterest of the profession 0 Good 1 To form alliances as co professionals to refrain from bad behavior immm 21 1 0252005 Conflicting Responsibilities 0 Common Conflict 4 Responsibilities to employer versus responsibilities to society o Tension between A Autonomy of individual Loyalty to employer 0 Example whistle blower mamm 22 ACM Code of Ethics 0 Commitment to ethical professional conduct is expected of every member voting members associate members and student members of the Association for Computing Machinery ACM 0 24 imperatives formulated as statements of personal responsibility 0 httpMNVWacmorgconstitutioncodeht Software Engineering Code of Ethics o Jointly by ACM and IEEECS o 8 principles 0 httpwwwcomputerorgportaIcms doc s computercomputercontentcodeof ethics pdf mamm u Approaches to Ethics Dr Paul C Grabow Baylor University 152006 Reference Do the Right Thing 2 d ed F J Beckwith ed Wadsworth 2002 pp xixviii ll lZEIEIB Contrary Impulses People decry 7 Rise ofincivility 7 Absence of personal virtues 7 Absence of virtue in elected of cials People do not want to appear judgmental 7 Morality is relative 7 Morality a matter of tastequot ll lZEIEIB Who are you to judge 0 Translated 7 Vou have no ngnt to make moralludgments aoout society quot 0 Response 7 l am a rational human person who l5 aware ofcertaln fundamental principles of loglc and moral reasoning Therefore l can make moral dlSlll lCllOl lS 7 Yo rclalrn aboutrnealudgrnentlnltselfls selrretutmg ln otherwords you cannot tell someone else tnat they cannot makeludgments and at tne same time make a judgment yourself ll ZUUB 152006 Four Approaches to Ethics Nonnormative 7 Descriptive ethics 7 Metaet i Normative 7 General normative ethics 7 Applied ethics ll ZUUB Nonnormative vs Normative Nonnormative 7 Examines morality withoutjudging something right orwron 7 Takes m moral position Normative 7 Considers whether something is right or wrong 7 Takes a moral position ll ZUUB Nonnormative Approaches Descriptive ethics 7 Attempts to describe and possibly explain moral practices an eliefs ofsocietyculture 7 Typically used by sociologists anthropologists and historians Metaethics 7 Attempts to analyze the meanings of ethical terms eg good bad duty right etc ll ZDUB 152006 Normative Approaches General normative ethics 7 Concerned with discovering the ethical theory or moral system that best describes our moral intuitions about certain actions 7 Prominenttheories utilitarian and deontological Applied ethics 7 Deals with speci c moral and social issues 7 Application of ethical theoryto these issues ll ZDUB Why does ethics appear difficult Amount of disagreement is overrated quot Common ground among those who disagree is ignored 5quot Erroneous appeal to personal autonomy ll ZDUB 1 Amount of disagreement overrated Response 7 Number oflegitimate positions per issue usually rather small ll lZDUB 152006 2 Common ground ignored Response 7 Tendency to focus on areas of disagreement 7 There are usually signi cant agreement on basic underlying concepts 7 There are a great number of issues on which most people agree ll lZDUB 3 Erroneous appeal to personal autonomy Tempting to reduce difficult issues to 7 Question of person preferencequot 7 Whether something is moral is up to the individualquot Appealing to personal autonomy usually dodges the real issue ll lZDUB Property Rights Dr Paul C Grabow Baylor University FrumJuhnsun D o Computer Ethics 3m Ed PrenticerHaii 2mm Two Basic Questions 0 Is computer software property 0 If it is property how should it be d proteote 25mm 2 Three Concepts 0 Copyright 0 Trade Secrets 0 Patents 25mm 232006 232006 Copyright 0 Primary purpose e the Progress of Science and To promot useful Arts 0 Strategy securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries 0 Basis US Constitution 4 Article I section 8 clause 8 25mm Copyright cont o Idea vs Expression of an Idea at Idea cannot be copyrighted at Expression of an idea can be copyrighted 0 Software Algorithms cannot be copyrighted Programs can be copyrighted 0 Offers little protection for software 0 Does not grant monopoly of control to holder 25mm Copyright cont o Distinction between idea and expression Not suitable for software 0 Copyright infringement Burden of proof on copyright holder Must show there is a striking resemblance between copyrighted software and infringed software 25mm 232006 Copyright cont 0 Okay to draw on copyrighted work to create or add something significantly new o Whelan v Jaslow 1987 1 copyright protection may extend beyond a program s literal code to its structure sequence and organization 25mm Trade Secrets 0 Purpose To protect company from losing its competitive edge 0 Trade secret must Have novelty Represent economic investment to the claimant Have involved some effortto develop Show that it made effort to keep secret 25mm Trade Secret cont 0 Problem with respect to software Difficult to maintain secrecy Company must effectively reveal the secret in orderto sell the software 0 Bottom line Not practical for protecting software 25mm Patents 0 Purpose To foster invention v To promote disclosure of inventions and To assure that ideas alrea domain are there for fre o A legitimate monopoly Right to exclude otherfrom making using or selling it dy in the public e use 4 Right to license others to make use or sell 25mm Patents cont 0 Three types we used for software Design A Plant forms ie varieties 0 Utility patent Granted for 17 years Term may be extended for additional five 25mm Patents cont 0 Following cannot be patented Abstract ideas 1 Algorithms Scienti c principles i Laws of nature 0 Patent claim must 1 Fall within the category ofpermissible subject matter Satisfy three separate tests Must have utility Musthave novelty Mus be nonrobvious 25mm 232006 Patents cont 0 Problem for software 1 Difficult to qualify as permissible subject matter o Has software been patented A Before 1981 very few After 1981 many 0 20000 software patents per year reported in 00 25mm Patents cont 0 Problems with software patents Software developer must do an extensive patent search to make sure that hisher software does not infringe upon an existing patent Patent office has poor classification scheme for software hence difficult to search 25mm u 232006 Concept of Property 0 Not a simple notion 0 Laws differ depending upon what is owned 0 Two theories of property Assignment of property rights based on good consequences of owning property Labor theory of property 25mm 1 s 232006 Concept of Property cont 0 Note Reasoning behind both copyright and patent is consequentialist ie utilitarian 0 Property justification 1 Often not based on social utility But based on a matter of natural right zemua Concept of Property cont 0 Natural Right Person has a natural right to what they produce 1 According to Locke person acquires a right to ownership when they mix their labor with it One s labor is an extension of their body consequently it cannot be owned by another 0 Can this be applied to software zemua Concept of Property cont 0 Critique of natural rights argument No necessary natural connection between your labor and rights to those things you create p 155 4 Labortheory only seems to apply to tangible things not nontangible o More than one person may have access to nontangible things such as intellectual ideas zemua Concept of Property cont 0 Software is 1 Nontangible based largely on ideas Easily reproducible 0 Labor theory cannot be used for software Does not provide suitable justification for property rights for so 0 So on what basis should we claim that software is property 25mm 1 5 232006 Argument 0 Software developers may not lose the products of their labor but they lose the capacity to sell and make money from what they crea e 0 Software as property Based on an economic right a An economic right is social not moral or natural right 25mm 2 Claims 0 Software developer has a right to ownership based on an economic righ v A right to sell and pro t from their creation Best understood in terms of consequences 0 Software ownership encourages Invention c Creative expression 25mm 21 232006 Is it wrong to copy software o It is wrong because it is illegal 4 Nothing inherently wrong other than it violates law Prima facie obligation to obey laws Only when there are laws against it does it have moral significance When a person s legal rights are violated the person is harmed 25mm Conclusions 0 Software property rights best understood in a oonsequentialist framework 25mm Holmes Chapter 6 Toward a Christian Ethic Dr Paul C Grabow Baylor University 1202006 mum by Hal 2 Graham 1 Reference 0 Holmes Arthur F Ethics Approaching Moral Decisions Chapter 6 Series Contours ofChn39stian Philosophy lnterVarsity Press1984 0 Jones David 0 Biblical Christian Ethics Baker 1994 o Pojman Louis P What is moral philosophyquot in Technology and Values K Shrader Frechette and L Westra eds Rowman amp Little eld 1997 o Adler Mortimer Six Greatldeas Macmillan 1981 mums by Hal 2 Graham 2 Some relevant ethics questions 0 What goals ought lwe to pursue in life 0 What sort of gersons ought lvve to be 0 What gractices ought lwe to follow mums pi Hal 2 Graham Morality as Normative o Concerned with what oughtto be ie norms How should I live mylife What is the right thing to do in this situation A What are the behavior norms o Behavioral norms may come from ecular ethics 39 Religious ethics eg Christian ethics L aw Etiquette wuzuua m Vaul Gvabwv 1202006 Categories mums by Vaul Gvabwv A Basic Framework 0 Ends What the agent tries to accomplish 0 Means 4 How the agent tries to accomplish the end o Motive Why is the agent committing the act wuzuua p Vaul Gvabwv Threefold Moral Evaluation Are the ends sought by the agent good and intrinsically worthy of human pursuit Are the means to the end good conforming to the standard of what is right Is the agents motive good wuzuua m Vaul c Giabwu 1 Threefold Moral Evaluation Want to be here mums m Hui c Giabwu I Standards of Judgment o Ends Judged good or evil by criteria of intrinsic value 0 Agents 1 Judged good or bad by criteria of moral virtue 0 Actions 4 Judged right or wrong by criteria of moral obligation wuzuua p Hui c Gvabwu 5 1202006 Criteria What and How 0 What are the criteria o How do we know the criteria 0 The answers depend on a Our view of ourselves as human beings and 1 What we regard as authoritative wuzuua m Vaul c Graham A Christian Ethic 0 Basic elements Ideals Vision Virtues Character A Standards Rules Norms 0 Example glory to God love of Christ Standard God s word Christ s example mums by Hal c Graham Christian Ethics 0 Role in a postmodern world Question inadequate moral positions Deepen our Christian convictions Point to a vision of the way things ought to es 0 Assumes some ultimate goal that gives meaning to existence The so called summum bonum wuzuua Dr Vaul c Graham 1202006 Christianity summum bonu 0 St Augustine To know and love God 0 Thomas Aquinus Friendship with God 0 Jonathan Edwards To re ect God s knowledge holiness and happiness 0 Carl Plantinga halom universal ourishing wholeness and elight d wuzuua m Vaul c Giabwu Holmes Approach 0 Ingredients r Cases ie individual situations Rules Principles 1 Bases ie primary authority 0 Each based on the one beneath eg cases based on rules 1202006 mums by Hal c Giabwu p Vaul c Gvabwu wuzuua Examples Ten Curnrnandrnents Exudus ZEI Authunty ur Gud s Ward wuzuua m Vaul c Graham 1 1202006 Moral Principles 0 The most inclusive amp ultimate ethical concepts 0 Apply universally o Exceptionless i cannot be preempted 0 Example What does the Lord require but to dojustice and to love kindness and to walk humbly with your Godquot Micah 6398 mums by Hal c Graham 11 Principle Justice 0 Concerned for persons 0 A distributive principle 0 Treats all equitably o Balances Equality and v Freedom wuzuua p Vaul c Graham 11 Justice Freedom Equality 0 Justice Serves as a balance for 39eedom and equality An unlimited good v Sovereign with respect to 39eedom and equality 0 Freedom and equality can only be maximized harmoniously when regulated byjustice 138 1202006 mums m m c elmu Justice Freedom Equality con 0 Freedom and equality Both desirable goods 0 Unregulated freedom a Results in license 143 o Unregulated equality gt Results in oppression mums m ml c elmu Situation Surveillance o Threatening email messages have been sent to individuals in and around Chicago The source has been traced to a particular company in Oak Park IL The IT manager has decided to scan all outgoing email messages and monitor web access But telling the employees would alert the person sending the messa What are the moral issues How should these issues be addressed mums pl ml c Gvabwv Accountability Dr Paul C Grabow Baylor University Frurn Johnson D c Cumputer Ethics 3m Ed Prenticerl lall 2mm mama 1 11152005 Some Questions 0 To what extent are computer professionals accountable for what they do 0 What does it mean to be accountable 0 Who should be accountable for what happens 0 What constitutes a failure mama 2 Accountability o Author 0 If someone is accountable then they are the appropriate person to respond to an event or incident or situation o Four different kinds of responsibility Roleresponsibility Causal responsibility Blameworthiness Liability mama 11152005 RoleResponsibility 0 Responsibility equivalent to duty 0 What someone is expected to do by virtue of one of their social roles 0 Unfortunately roles are not always very clearly articulated a My understanding of a role may be rather different from what society understands Roles may not be obvious until someone does not fulfill the expected role mama Causal Responsibility c When an agent did something or failed to do something that caused the event in question 0 An agent may or may not be a person 0 Often difficult to determine cause Cause may be related to a chain of actions or decisions consequently the end result may be rather far removed from the initial mama Blameworthiness 0 An agent caused something that is wrong or bad ie being at fault 0 Not simply a question of cause o Often occurs when an agent fails to fulfill a roleresponsibility eg a camper fails to put out a campfire which ultimately results in a forest fire mama Liability 0 Defined by law 0 The law defines who is liable in a given situation 1 eg you are liable when someone gets hurt on your property 0 Often tied to roleresponsibility causal responsibility or blameworthiness wi zun Strict Liability 0 Liability without fault 0 Used to encourage people 1 to take precautions and it to make things safe 0 Where this applies the liable party is responsible for damagescompensation even though they did nothing wrong wi zun Buying and Selling Software 0 How reliable should software be 0 Who should be liable when software causes harm o What should software vendors tell customers about the software 0 How much should a customer be expected to know about the software they purchase mama 11152005 11152005 Buying and Selling Software o The Categorical Imperative 1 Never treat a person merely as a means to an end o Ifthe seller manipulates the buyerto purchase something that they really do not need then the seller is treating the customer merely as a means to an end mam Buying and Selling Software o Honesty Telling customers everything about software seems unreasonable 1 Does it mean 0 Simply answering customers questions truthfully or Or also telling customers wh respect to the customers ne 4 Being honest is rather complex o But crucial to ethical selling at is relevant with eds mam Buying and Selling Software o Coercion To force someone to do something is to treat them as a thing Also complex and an important part of selling Some coercion is okay if it is done in the best interests of the customer eg if the customer is completely passive mama 11152005 Legal Relationships o Contractual relationship The core of the buyingselling relationship Good way to clarify terms of buying and selling A eg EULA end user license agreement 0 Torts Deal with any wrongful act other than breach of contract for which Maction may be brought Whether this relates to software depends o m mama Software Product or Service o Intangiblllty of software Does not determine whether software is a product or a service 1 Product liability law does not View products as necessarily tangible o How things are bought and sold Massmarketed software Customized software mama How can software be sold 0 Prince three different ways an analogy Customer buys a suit ready to wear v Customer buys a suit tailored specifically for them v Customer buys a suit off the rack and altered for their special measurements 0 Prince a Treat massmarketed software as a product E Treat customized software as a service mama 11152005 How can software be sold Joni o If defect in massmarketed part Product law should apply o If defect created during modification 1 Law dealin with services should a I I o Strict liability can be applied if software is a product 0 Prince Strict liability makes sense for canned so ware but not for customized sottware 1111mm 1 1 Strict Liability 0 Under the Unified Commercial Code UCC Producer has placed the thing in the stream of commerce to earn a profit he or she must bear risk of loss or injury Producer is in the best position to anticipate and control the risks they are best able to make product sa e Producer is in best position to spread cost of injury overall buyers producer can 39n r39ce of roduct 1111mm 1 1 Strict Liability cont o Arguments for strict liability are utilitarian o Discourages faulty products 0 Does not necessarily prevent release of dangerous or faulty produc o Gives producer strong incentive to produce safe products 0 Goes against common moral intuition producer responsible for something that they could not foresee or prevent 1111mm 1 1 11152005 StnctLJabHHycont 0 Doesn t make sense for customized software Producer does not put customized software into stream of commerce 1 Hence customized software should not be considered a product o Does make sense for massmarketed software Which is considered to be a product mama 1 s Negngnce o A failure to do something that a reasonable and prudent person would have done o In common law Assumed that individuals who engage in certain activities owe a duty of care v Negligence is a failure to fulfill that duty eg security guard o Often used to describe blameworthy behavior of rofessionals mama 2n Negngncecont 0 When roleresponsibilities are clear i It is easy to determine whether an individual has been negligent or not 0 When roleresponsibilities are not clear It is dif cult to determine negligence 0 To prosecute computer professionals prevailing standards must be identified Which is dif cult because standards can change eg standards in so ware design mama 21 Diffusion of Accountability 0 Factors that contribute to diffusion 1 Scale and complexity of computer systems The many hands involved in developing e distributing and using softwar The way in which computer systems often mediate human decision making mama Moral Responsibility 0 Attributed to moral agents ie human beings 0 Only human beings bear moral responsibility Computer systems bear no moral responsibility 39 Com uter rofessionals bear moral res onsibilit o What if1 39 A computer system is so complex that no one can really understand it Can anyone be held accountable if the system fails mama Moral Responsibility cont 0 What if 2 If the complexity and scale of the computer system requires many people to be involved in its development 4 Can any one of them be held accountable o Therac 25 p 189 Computercontrolled radiation machine Use cause disfigurement and death of patients Was anyone held accountable mama 11152005 11152005 Strict Liability reprise o Justifies legal responsibility 0 Does notjustify moral responsibility Which usually has a strong element of blameworthiness o What if 3 at A development team did everything in their power to make a software system safe yet an unforeseen situation occurs and someone is hurt Is the development team responsible mam ISP Liability 0 Electronic forums Can easily spread false damaging information 1 Difficult to police Anonymity often makes tracing impossible o Stratton Oakmont Inc v Prodigy 1995 a Court imposed liability on Prodigy 4 Because Prodigy advertised editorial control over it bulletin boards mam For Your Information o Defamation Publication of a false statement about another person that harms the person s reputation o Slander v A false and malicious spoken statement 0 Libel 4 Publication of a false statement that is damaging to a person s reputation mam 11152005 ISP Liability 0 Communications Decency Act CDA of 1996 Eventually struck down by US Supreme Court Section 230 still stands No provideroruserofan interactive computerseivic snail betreated as the publisherorspeakerofanyiriformatiori rov ed b ario er n ider p id y tn i formation contentprov The Sorcalled d Samaritan immunity for lSPS Essentially overruled Strattoi i v Oakmoi it o ISPs encouraged to monitor andfiter but are not liable for electronic forums Within their serVIce domain 0 However ISPs can censor or filter forums mam 2 1102007 What is ethics Baylor University Dr Paul C Grabow What is moral philosophy We are discussing no small matter but how we ou tto livequot paieyeme F ninizn Some Terms Ethics t m x Mora From the Latin moreis mos custom 39r Mores moral attitutdes habits manners v Morality Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior 1v Moral philosophy Fri 70 ai 1102007 Moral Philosophyp 39r Seeks to analyze in their moral contexts Right wrong permissible ought good and evil 39r Seeks to establish 0 Principles of right behaviorto serve as action guides for individuals and groups 39r Investigates Which values and virtues are worthwhile for life or society Morality as Normative 39r Concerned with what oughtto be ie norms How should I live my life What is the right thing to do in this situation What are the behavior norms 39r Behavioral norms may come from Secular ethics Religious ethics e Christian ethics L I aW Etiquette Subject Normative Sanctions Disjuncts 1102007 Legal ethical andor etiquette l Waco does not allow me to keep a goat in my backyard My company monitors my actions Debra cuts in line at the ticket counter 4 So ware is released before it is readyquot f Mary intentionally says something to defame som mm F ElE iE iiKE palm Some Purposes of Morality 0 keep society from falling apart 0 ameliorate human suffering 0 promote human ourishing o resolve con icts of interest in just and erly ways liliiiiiiii To keep society from falling 1102007 To ameliorate human suffering In shelters Tuesday as the 2mm nllhe la s l2 Gun Cnasl became ever clearer T lealh 1 n2 2 a as m n I l awn there is just ennrmnus Gnv lrsail nnNBC39squotTmlay39 he a 39 I r anInn mule J slums nu recnnl m the Llnilexl sums What does it mean to flourish Does it only involve having stu To resolve con icts Northwest AirlInes management vows it will keep ts planes flying even if mechanics there strike thls weekend August 192905 1102007 Per 1quot Some relevant ethics questions 39r What oals ought we to pursue in life 39r What sort of ersons ought we to be 39r What ractices ought we to follow F El Basic Framework r Ends 0 What the agent tries to accomplish 39r Means How the agent tries to accomplish the end Threefold Moral Evaluation Are the ends sought by the agent good and intrinsically worthy of human pursuit 39 Is the agent s motive good Are the means to the end good conforming to the standard of what is right 1102007 Threefold Moral Evaluation Good Good Ends Motive I Good Want to be here Standards ofJudgmgnt V 39 Ends Judged good or evil by criteria of intrinsic value 39 Agents Judged good or bad by criteria ofmoral virtue 139 Actions Judged right or wrong by criteria ofmoral obiation Criteria What and HSi39N 39 What are the criteria v How do we know the criteria 39r The answers depend on o Ourview of ourselves as human beings and o What we regard as authoritative 1102007 Prominent Ethical Theories 39 Ethical Egoism Standard selfinterest 39 Conventional moralit Standard current views ofsociety 39 Utilitarianism Standard greatest bene t for most people 39 Duty Ethics Standard for sake ofduty 39 Virtue Ethics Standard virtues eg wisdom temperance prudence Ethical Egoism r Choose action based on o What causes m most individual pleasure and least pain 397 Ethical egoism39 0 Action is right if it promotes one s own self interest Greed is good Conventional Morality 39 Choose action based on o Expectations of others in society 39r Claim 0 A person s longterm interest lies in maintaining social standards 1102007 Utilitarianism 39r Choose action based on Produces greatest benefit for largest number of people r An action is right if it is useful Duty Ethics 39r Choose action based on An ultimate universal standardquot 39r Categorical Imperative Immanuel Kant 1724 1804 Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that I should become a universal lawquot Act so that you treat humanity whether in your own person orin that of another always as an end and never as a means onlyquot Virtue Ethics 39 Develop the virtues in yourself so that 0 You can choose rightly 39r Good ife consists in Forming good habits of character 39r Involves more than following abstract norms such as utility or duty 1102007 References 39y Pojman Louis P What is moral philosophy in Technology and Values K Shrader Frechette and L Westra eds Rowman amp Littlefield 39 Jones David C Biblical Christian Ethics Baker 1994 Beabout G R and D J Wennemann Applied Professional Ethics University Press of America 1994 Mn 1 0182005 Privacy Dr Paul C Grabow Baylor University Some Quotes 0 Scott McNealy CEO ofSun Microsystems r privacy is dead get over it a nB rgck Meeks chiefWashington correspondentfor True privacy like true security is a myth 0 Joel Klein quotAnonymousquot author of Primary Colors Arioriymity imposes a strict discipline and an almost religious humility 0 Rebecca Mercuir research fellow at Harvard39s John F Kennedy Schoo o ovemment privacy is an lnforrnatlol lrage luxury certairily riot free lulmm Is there a problem 0 Computers make it possible to gather detailed information to an extent never possible before 0 Organizations have an increased capacity to not only monitor but to control individuals 0 When people are monitored their behavior tends to change lulmm 1 0182005 Ways computer technology has chaned recorded keein 39 The scale of information gathering has increased significantly The kind of information that can be gathered has changed The scale of information exchange has increased enormously inns2cm A Technology Removes Limits 0 Technology has removed many limits associated with information gathering eg Physical location of information Physical copy of information 1 Person to person transfer 0 Example County records lulmm s Privacy Act of 1974 0 Restricted data matching 0 Applied only to federal government 0 Did not apply to private organizations inns2cm 1 0182005 Some Problems 0 Information distributed without knowledge of the person 0 Personal information can be incorrect 0 Information can be outof date 0 Information collected even if it is not relevant 0 Information gets used if it is available even though it is not relevant or reliable inns2cm Information technology allows 0 New kinds of information eg transactions 0 Effects of erroneous information to be magnified 0 Information to endure much longer immma Computers and Privacy o Often framed as conflict between Needs of information users and Needs or rights of people whom information is about o This framing favors information gathers at How Why inns2cm 1 0182005 A Major Issue Persuriai Privacy info Gatherer mama 1n Is privacy a right 0 reference The U 8 Constitution Oriiine USCOriStitutiori riet O Specificaiiy httg WWW uscoristitutiori iietCoristriot htmi o The Constitution does hot Specificaiiy mention a hght to privacy oweveh Supreme Court decisions overthe years have acy i5 a basic human hght and as ue o the 9th Amehdmeht The hght to pnvacy has come to e pubiic s attention via severai controversiai Supreme Court ruiii igi H iciudii ig severai deaiirig With contraception the Griswoid and Eisenstadt cases ihtehaeiai marriage the Loving case and abortion the weir v Wade case in additioh it i5 Said that a hght to mahy or the amendments in the Biii or 3rd the me Search and seizure iimiti ahd hts such asthe the ins seifr ihehmihation iimit mama 11 Legal and Constitutional 0 Deborah Johnson at most a limited an complex right to privacy 0 To argue for privacy against info gathering Either must show a grave risk or danger with info gathering or Must show greater benefit to be gained from constraining info gathering v 1 0182005 Two Big Questions 39I What is privacy 1 Complex and elusive Varies based on circumstances or location 2 Why is it valuable mimma 1 Intrinsic or instrumental good 0 Privacy as intrinsic good Not a question of what end it creates Good no matter what A Difficult to defend 0 Privacy as instrumental good 1 Means to an end Connected to something else of obvious value tummm u Privacy as Instrumental Good 0 Charles Fried 1968 Necessary for democracy Argued privacy necessary for relationships of intimacy and trust 0 Privacy and autonomy connected Autonomy fundamental to being human Kant Loss of privacy would threaten fundamental values Autonomy inconceivable without privacy mimma 1s 1 0182005 Information Mediates Relationships 0 James Rachels 1975 1 People need control over personal information in order to maintain a diversity of relationships When we lose control over personal information 0 Lose control over how others perceive us 0 People can respond to me when me really is Information can move person to person without r u 39 lulmm Nn ll 2 tn quotman al a Infnrmzhnn IndividualOrganization Relationshis o Threat based on scale of info gathering at Most affects individualorganization relationships 0 Information determines how we are treated in that relationship o Difficult for individual to know what personal information has been collected cl13mm 11 Legal Approach since 1970s 1 Emphasis on protection from government recordkeeping Private organizations would selfregulate 2 Piecemeal ratherthan comprehensive 4 Separate legislation for credit cards educational records medical records employment records lulmm 1 Questions 0 What moral principles should govern our attitude toward privacy 0 What are some of the major problems associated with privacy that remain essentially unsolved lmmma 1s 1 0182005 Current Situation 0 No comprehensive set of policiesrules For data collection and use That considers What is best for society 0 Problem framed as 1 Info gathers E privacy advocates Biased against privacy advocates lummma 2n Privacy as a Social Good 0 Priscilla M Regan Privacy should be on par with other social goods eg law enforcement or government efficiency 4 Privacy more likely to be treated as equally impo an 0 Deborah Johnson a Loss of privacy 9 reduces our autonomy a Loss of privacy 9 loss of freedom Privacy necessary for democracy lmmma 21 1 0182005 Legislation Piecemeal 0 Fair Credit Reporting Act 1992 0 Electronic Communications Privacy Act 986 0 Family and Educational Privacy Act 1974 0 Privacy Act 1974 0 Video Privacy Protection Act 1988 0 Telephone Customer s Protection Act 0 Drivers Privacy Protection Act 1994 inns2cm 22 Code of Fair Information c From a 1973 report of a federal commi 0 Never adopted as law 0 In 1970s and 1980s treated as a standard 0 No longer seems to be a standard immma 2 Code of Fair Information Practices cont arahrased No personal data recordkeeping system whose very existence is secret a way for an individual to nd out what information about himher is on record and how it is a way for an individual to prevent information about himher obtained for one purpose to be used for other purposes Must be a way for an individual to correct or amend personal information anization creating records of people must assure reliability ofdata an take action to prevent inns2cm u 1 0182005 Why is the code currently imractical 0 Existence of databases 0 Locate information o Monitor use 0 Correct information o Assure reliability and prevent misuse imimms As Professionals c From original ACM Code of Professional Conduct 1973 Minimize data collected Limit authorized access to data Provide proper security for data Determine required retention period of data Ensure proper disposal of data imimms 2 As Individuals Don t give out more info inan is necessary Don t saytnings oyera cellular pnone that you would not mind someone overneanng Ask yourbankto sign agreement not to reiease info to anyone Wiinoui iegai authority Obtain oopies ofcredit neaiin and other records to check for accuracy lfrefused oredirioo loan or apartment ask Wny Respond carefullyto surveys Realize rebate programs orwarranty oards often snare inro Wiin mailingnlist oompanies Also See littg WWW epic org imimms Holmes Chapter 8 The Basis of Obligation Dr Paul C Grabow Baylor University From Ethics Approaching Moral Decision ArthurF Holmes lnterVarsity Press 1984 1292007 Some Questions 0 How can We derive ought from is Empirical facts impose obligations on us 0 Why Oughtl be moral Be good 0 Where 39 Does the ought come from tlzglzum by Hal 2 Graham 0 Defined in his Republic good 0 the harmonious unity of all that is moral good 0 a harmony of all virtues under the rule of reason tlzglzut pi Hal 2 Graham Plato cont 0 He assumed 1 Those who know the good o will desire it 1 Moral virtue is a prerequisite o for knowing the good 0 Therefore I must m W a s ep b 3m7 Know the good to desire virtue 0 Be virtuous to know the good VZQIZDW m m c Giabwu Plato cont o He proposed a Organize society so that ot o e who knowthe good will rule those who do not knowthe good In his Laws 0 Atheists excluded from the ideal state because it is 0 command our duties therefore they would not be good citizens 0 But there is still a problem Why ought those who know the good do it Viamm m Hui c Giabwu Plato versus Christianity 0 Plato Ultimate reality an ideal that exists independently of any person human or divine ie the forms Ideals command ie impose obligations 0 Christianity 1 Ultimate reality a personal God Persons command ie impose obligations VZQIZDW pi Hui c Giabwu 1292007 1292007 Utilitarianism a reprise 0 Does not 1 Provide an ought Define the good lmply an obligation Relate the ought to the good 0 Utilitarianism may has well have jettisoned concepts of moral obligation and duty Elizabeth Anscumbe English Cathull phllusupher mama m m c Giabwv 1 Three Alternatives to the Question 0 Who or what creates obligation 0 Either it is Selfimposed Imposed by people or Imposed by God llzglzum by Hal c Giabwv I Ought is SelfImposed o Obligation only through an act of my will 0 Jean Paul Sartre lBEIEVlBEEI French existentialist Marxist atheist God does not exist so o I must invent values what I ought to be The individual is completely autonomous No room fora higher authority Human freedom is absolute mama pl Vaul c Giabwv s 1292007 Ought is SelfImposed cont 0 Immanuel Kant 17244804 l Emphasized autonomy of the will ruled byself at Rather than heteronomy of the will ruled by something outside oneself A Will governed 0 Only by reason o Not by any higher authority Valium m m c Graham Ought is SelfImposed cont 0 Kant s respect for persons The ought arises logically Intrinsic value of persons assigned a priori o Begs the question Where does the ought a What gives persons such value that it obligates others o Obligation appears to be assigned arbitrarily llzglzum by Hal c Graham Ought Socially Imposed 0 Social contract theory Moral obligations are negotiated within civil society and agreed upon by consent A Obligations do not come from nature Requires certain things of its citizens 0 John Locke 16324704 Advanced social contract theory Explained marriage family government as contrac Valium pl Vaul c Graham Ought Socially Imposed co 0 Relies on the good of the organization that makes the contract 0 However an organization 1 Is not necessarily inherently good Has no inherent moral authority 0 What obligates the organization ie what obligates those who obligate lagmm Dr ml c Graham Ought Socially Imposed co 0 John Rawls lBZlVZEIEIZ Moral judgments shouldbe based on a hypothetical social agreement about ustlce as fairness First Each person should have the greatest llberty compatlble Wlth slrnllar greatest llberty forall c Soclal and economlc lnequalltles are to arranged for the greatest benent or the least advantaged Whlle provldlrlg ual opportunlty for all falmeSS Rawls cO cept l5 only a hypothetlcal lmpel atlve llzwzum Dr ml c Graham Some Observations o R M Hare lBlBVZEIEIZ r Most ethical theories fail to account for the ought that commands us Sublectlvlsm reduces lmpel atlves to staternents about sublectlve states egolsrn and utllltananlsrn reduce them to determll llsms reduces them to causes ratherthal l ommarlds Power or rnoral lmperatlves therl depends on my declslon about the lltlnd or person lwarlt to be and the Way or llre l prerer lagmm pl ml c Graham 1292007