Impact of Computerson Society9. 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

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

United States Constitution 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 FactorsImagine 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