computer ethics

philosophy Ethics is the field of study that is concerned

with questions of value, that is, judgments about what human

behaviour is "good" or "bad". Ethical judgments are no

different in the area of computing from those in any other

area. Computers raise problems of privacy, ownership, theft,

and power, to name but a few.

Computer ethics can be grounded in one of four basic

world-views: Idealism, Realism, Pragmatism, or Existentialism.

Idealists believe that reality is basically ideas and that

ethics therefore involves conforming to ideals. Realists

believe that reality is basically nature and that ethics

therefore involves acting according to what is natural.

Pragmatists believe that reality is not fixed but is in

process and that ethics therefore is practical (that is,

concerned with what will produce socially-desired results).

Existentialists believe reality is self-defined and that

ethics therefore is individual (that is, concerned only with

one's own conscience). Idealism and Realism can be considered

ABSOLUTIST worldviews because they are based on something

fixed (that is, ideas or nature, respectively). Pragmatism

and Existentialism can be considered RELATIVIST worldviews

because they are based or something relational (that is,

society or the individual, respectively).

Thus ethical judgments will vary, depending on the judge's

world-view. Some examples:

First consider theft. Suppose a university's computer is used

for sending an e-mail message to a friend or for conducting a

full-blown private business (billing, payroll, inventory,

etc.). The absolutist would say that both activities are

unethical (while recognising a difference in the amount of

wrong being done). A relativist might say that the latter

activities were wrong because they tied up too much memory and

slowed down the machine, but the e-mail message wasn't wrong

because it had no significant effect on operations.

Next consider privacy. An instructor uses her account to

acquire the cumulative grade point average of a student who is

in a class which she instructs. She obtained the password for

this restricted information from someone in the Records Office

who erroneously thought that she was the student's advisor.

The absolutist would probably say that the instructor acted

wrongly, since the only person who is entitled to this

information is the student and his or her advisor. The

relativist would probably ask why the instructor wanted the

information. If she replied that she wanted it to be sure

that her grading of the student was consistent with the

student's overall academic performance record, the relativist

might agree that such use was acceptable.

Finally, consider power. At a particular university, if a

professor wants a computer account, all she or he need do is

request one but a student must obtain faculty sponsorship in

order to receive an account. An absolutist (because of a

proclivity for hierarchical thinking) might not have a problem

with this divergence in procedure. A relativist, on the other

hand, might question what makes the two situations essentially

different (e.g. are faculty assumed to have more need for

computers than students? Are students more likely to cause

problems than faculty? Is this a hold-over from the days of

"in loco parentis"?).

\"Philosophical Bases of Computer Ethics\", Professor RobertN. Barger .

Usenet newsgroups: news:bit.listserv.ethics-l,

news:alt.soc.ethics.

(1995-10-25)