Ethics: An Introduction - Chapter 2

• The lesson serves as an introduction to ethics.
• The chapter is covered in chapter 2 of a textbook.
• Providing an introduction to ethics.
• A review of multiple ethical theories will be done.
• Evaluating different situations by using ethical theories.
• Studying is important in Computer Ethics: Intellectual Property, Privacy, Computer Crime, Computer Abuse, and Responsibility.

Chapter Overview

• Introduction to ethics will be given
• There will a review of eight ethical theories
• Workable ethical theories are compared
• Morality of breaking the law will be covered

The Ethical Point of View

• Most people share core values, such as life, happiness, and accomplishing goals.
• Two ways to view the world: selfish and ethical point of view.
• Selfish View: only consider themselves and their core values
• Ethical View: respect other people and their core values

Defining Terms

• Society: Association of people organized under a system of rules.
• Rules within a society advance the good of members over time.
• Morality: A society's rules of conduct.
• Morality: What people ought or ought not to do in various situations.
• Ethics: Rational examination of morality.
• Ethics: includes the evaluation of people's behavior also
• Ethics: Doing the morality

Ethics vs Morals

• Ethics come from the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a group, culture, etc.
• Morals are an individual's principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct.
• Ethics are external/social system sources, while morals are internal/individual.
• What society says is the right thing to do is ethics, but what one believes is right or wrong is morals
• Ethics may cause peer/societal disapproval, but morals may cause discomfort or remorse if broken
• Ethics are dependent on definition for others and are consistent, but can vary between context
• Morals are consistent, but can change if an individual's beliefs change

Ethics vs Morals Example

• An example of a conflict between ethics and morals is the work of a defense attorney.
• A lawyer's morals may tell her that murder is reprehensible and that murderers should be punished.
• Her ethics as a professional lawyer require her to defend her client to the best of her abilities, even if she knows that the client is guilty.

Ethics Note

• Someone strictly following Ethical Principles may not have any Morals at all.
• Someone could violate Ethical Principles within a given system of rules in order to maintain Moral integrity.

Why Study Ethics

• Ethics: This can assist in deciding the best thing to do
• New ethical problems accompany new technologies.
• "Common wisdom" may not exist for novel situations brought about by new technologies.
• Ethics include rational, systematic analysis.
• “Doing ethics" requires an explanation of answers,
• Explanations: Include facts, shared values, logic
• Ethics include voluntary moral choices
• Workable ethical theory: produces explanations that might be persuasive to a skeptical, yet open-minded audience

Ethical Theories

• Subjective Relativism
• Cultural Relativism
• Divine Command Theory
• Ethical Egoism
• Kantianism
• Act Utilitarianism
• Rule Utilitarianism
• Social Contract Theory

Relativism Explanation

• Relativism: there are no universal norms of right and wrong.
• One person can say "X is right," another can say "X is wrong," and both can be right.
• Subjective relativism: Each person decides right and wrong for himself or herself.
• “What's right for you may not be right for me"

Subjective Relativism

• Well-meaning and intelligent people disagree on moral issues.
• Ethical debates are disagreeable and pointless.
• Blurs distinction between doing what you think is right and doing what you want to do.
• Makes no moral distinction between the actions of different people.
• Subjective relativism and tolerance are two different things.
• Decisions may not be based on reason, so it's not a workable ethical theory

Cultural Relativism

• Definition: what is “right" and "wrong" depends upon a society's actual moral guidelines.
• These guidelines may vary from place to place and from time to time.
• A particular action may be right in one society at one time and wrong in other society or at another time.
• Different social contexts demand different moral guidelines.
• Ethical arrogance means that a society should not judge another.
• Two societies having different moral views doesn't mean they ought to have different views.
• It doesn't explain how moral guidelines are determined.
• If there are no cultural norms?
• It doesn't account for evolution of moral guidelines.
• It provides no way out for cultures in conflict
• Existence of many acceptable practices does not imply all practices are acceptable (many/any fallacy).
• Societies do share core values, but are only indirectly based on reason.
• Cultural Relativism isn't a workable ethical theory

Divine Command theory

• Good actions: those aligned with God's will
• Bad actions: those contrary to God's will
• Holy books reveal God's will
• We should take holy books as moral decision-making guides
• We owe obedience to our creator who's all-knowing and the ultimate authority
• Different holy books disagree
• Society is multicultural, secular.
• Some modern moral problems not addressed in scripture
• "The good" ≠ “God” (equivalence fallacy)
• It's based on obedience, not reason.
• Divine Command is generally not a workable theory
• Islam as a specific case of divine command is considered workable
• All points of (Case Against Divine Command Theory) are not applicable on Islam.

Ethical Egoism

• Each person should focus exclusively on his or her self-interest.
• Morally right action: that action that provides self with maximum long-term benefit.
• Ethical Egoism is practical since everyone is inclined to do what's best for themselves
• It's better to let people take care of themselves because the community can benefit the individuals putting their well-being first
• Other moral principles are rooted in the self-interest theory
• An easy theory is not always the best
• It's known a lot about what is good for someone else
• Self-interest can lead to blatantly immoral behavior, and other principles are superior to this
• Taking the good of others into account leads to happier lives
• It does not respect the ethical point of view, so isn't workable

Kantianism

• Good will: the desire to do the right thing.
• Only thing in world that is good with no qualification is goodwill according to Immanuel Kant.
• Reason should cultivate doing the right thing.
• Act only from moral rules that one can at the same time will to be universal moral laws.

Categorical Imperative

• If someone in dire straits asks to make a promise with the intention of breaking it later: the rule is flawed and the answer should be "no"
• The 2nd formulation means: Act so that one treat both yourself and other people as ends in themselves and never only as a means to an end.
• It is an easier way of the Categorical Imperative to work with

The Kantian Evaluation scenario: A plagiarized report

• A single, working mother names Carla who's taking two night courses is struggling in her History class
• A history class requires more work than normal, however, Carla makes "A" on all her work
• Carla doesn't have time to write her final report, so purchases it and submits it as her own

Kantian Evaluation

• (1st Formulation): Carla wants credit for a plagiarized report, so "You may claim credit for work performed by someone else"
• If a rule is universalized, it no longer gives credit for reports
• Proposal moral rule is self-defeating
• It's wrong for Carla to turn it in
• (2nd Formulation): Carla submitted another person's work as her own to deceive her professor through treating them as a means to an end.
• In conclusion, what Carla did was wrong Rational, produces universal moral guidelines, and treats all persons as moral equals.
• It is therefore workable

Perfect and Imperfect Duties

• Perfect Duty: Duty obliged to fulfill without exception.
• An example would be telling the truth.
• Imperfect Duty: Duty obliged to fulfill in general but not in every instance
• An example of this would be helping others
• Sometimes no rule adequately characterizes an action
• Sometimes there is no way to resolve 2 perfect duties, and Kantianism allos no exceptions

Utilitarianism

• The proper course of action maximizes utility.
• Utility is usually defined as maximizing happiness and reducing suffering.
• The moral worth of an action is determined only by its resulting outcome
• Total happiness of affected parties is best, even if people involved don't matter

Principle of Utility

• Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill came up with the principle of utility.
• An action is good if it benefits someone
• An action is bad if it harms someone
• Utility: tendency of an object to produce happiness or prevent unhappiness for an individual or a community.
• Happiness can be an advantage in the form of the benefit of good pleasure.
• Unhappiness is a disadvantage that includes cost evil and pain

Act Utilitarianism

• Morality of an action has nothing to do what was intended
• Focuses on whether the consequences increase changes of happiness in affected parties
• It has to affect all beings
• Total happiness/ sum being above 0 shows good action because it is up to people to calculate what is better

Highway Routing act utilitarianism

• The state may replace a curvy stretch of highway for a new segment a mile shorter, however
• 150 houses would have to be removed and wildlife habitat would be destroyed
• $20 million to compensate homeowners, $10 million to construct the highway, and $2 million wildlife loss
• Concluded is a good action with benefits that exceed costs Focuses on everyone's happiness.
• Down-to-earth and comprehensive is a working ethical theory

Case Against act Utilitarianism

• It is unclear whom to include in calculations, there's too much work, it ignores sense of duty, and moral luck
• Moral Luck: When the bad is out of the individual's control

Rule Utilitarianism

• Should adopt which will lead to greater increase by everyone of happiness
• Act utilitarianism includes action principles to individuals
• Rule is a law
• In August 2003 Blaster Worm infected Windows computers a bit after Nachi Worm appeared
• Who helps people keep their system updated with buggy anti-worms
• Systems admin

Rule Utilitarianism

• The rule includes writing worms from infected shielded people to stop attacks so everyone
• Is doing that for the benefit? A good rule in which harm out weighs good

Rule Utilitarianism pros vs cons

• Compared to act utilitarianism, it is easier to perform the utilitarian calculus.
• Moral rules survive for bad to get better

Act vs Rule

• Act Utilitarianism judges actions affect on individual
• Judges laws based in terms of laws
• This believes that its can be morally right it if conforms

Case against utilitarianism

• Must be measured on scales
• Does not mean great
• It will be good or ethical

Social Contract Theory

• Thomas Hobbes created state of nature which helped establish social and moral rules
• Jean-Jacques Rousseau created the concept of ideal society where no one makes bad laws
• Which promotes right to privacy
• Negative can guaranteed by one side

Positive and Negative rights

• Negative means people leave right
• And positively requires to do something on left
• And that the rights needs equal liberty
• Which require justice in a free market that open

Social Contract Theory

• It is a theory framed in language of contracts and that shows why people in community act against each other
• However, it must unjustly treat contracts when there are non
• Act against and rights are limited to no contracts
• The theory does have major issues

Objectivism vs Relativism

• Relativism sees morality as human invention
• And objectivism is the mind
• Contras kant and social

Utilitarianism

• Act increase total and affect parties
• Rues affect people when it comes to greatest
• Social helps benefit group of individuals

Kant and Socials

• It allows to be stable no undermining
• It's good and that leads to community and respect or people will be punished

Social Contract Theory

• Laws are equal to benefits
• Everything should be law-by adding to not be injustice because harmful action is better

Kantian Perspective

• Just imagine that if you break someone's law you have to get treated unjustly

Unitarian Perspective

• Breaking the law
• That effects people unjust and feel please
• And the harmful are the one effect by law by increasing burden greater than benefits

Summary of Ethical laws

• Cant respects action to not be against other
• Utilitarian shows consequence before action
• Social contract life to liberty

Mixing EthicaL laws

• Considering action of each individual
• But considering action of others

An overview of ethics, covering an introduction, eight ethical theories, and a comparison of workable ethical theories. The lesson explores the ethical point of view versus a selfish view. It also addresses the morality of breaking the law.