CS 4001 Homeworks

Ethics Scenario Analysis

This INDIVIDUAL assignment is about the applicability of specific ethical theories or codes in a practical scenario. There are three parts to the question.

The scenario:

You run a small company that developed and markets a filter program to help parents filter out material that they do not wish their children to access on the Internet. Now, a foreign government wants your company to develop a custom version of the program to be used on the country's Internet connection to the rest of the world. The custom program is to filter out material that the government does not want its citizens to access. Your work in filtering is widely acknowledged as pioneering in the field and has influenced many products, including those of competitors. If anyone is to take this contract, you are probably the most competent person to do so.

Your dilemma:

You are to consider whether it would be right or wrong for you to accept the contract (or perhaps, how you could reframe the problem so that the dilemma becomes more tractable).

Part 1:

For EACH of the THREE ethical perspectives given below ((i) through (iii)), answer the following questions:

  1. From the ethical perspective in question, give arguments in favor of accepting the contract, and arguments against.
  2. Based on these arguments and on your understanding of the perspective, does the perspective imply that it ethically proper to accept the contract (or conversely that it is ethically wrong)? Explain why the perspective says that it is or is not permissibl e.

In this part, do NOT give your personal opinion about the dilemma and your course of action. The question here is what advice the ethical perspective gives you, not whether you should take it.

The ethical perspectives you are to adopt are as follows:

  1. Act utilitarianism: All things considered, your best decision is the one that will lead to the best outcomes afterward among all those affected by your decision. To answer this section of Part 1, you will have to stipulate an outcome criterion (pleasu re? happiness? something else?), identify the affected populations of people, and explain how you can compute or estimate the relevant outcome for these people. Remember that if you don't take the contract, someone else will. Should that affect your evalu ation of the outcomes?
  2. Kantianism: According to one formulation of Kant's categorical imperative, you should never act in such a way that another person is merely a means to your ends. Rather you should consider others as ends in themselves. According to another formulation , you should never do anything that could not be willed as a universal maxim, otherwise you would be guilty of a contradiction and could not act in good faith. What does Kant's categorical imperative imply you should do?
  3. Virtue ethics: According to Aristotle's theory of the virtues, we should seek to act out of a well-developed set of moral habits that emerge as part of our education and development without having to deliberate too anxiously about any moral scenario we fa ce. Rather than research Aristotle's supposed virtues, you are free to list any character virtues that you think are relevant to this case. Examples might include honesty, integrity, generosity, etc. Remember, that according to Aristotle, one should not n eglect the virtues, but neither should one go out on a limb and overemphasize any one virtue at the expense of others. Moderation is the key. What would the well-rounded, morally fitness-trained professional do in this scenario?

Part 1 is worth 70 percent of the assignment grade. Organize your answer so that the three perspectives are treated separately and your answers to (a) and (b) are given for each perspective in turn. I need to know exactly what part of the answer I am read ing. Don't make me read between the lines!

Part 2:

Briefly summarize what insights this activity provides you. Are there aspects of the situation that you think the perspectives do not consider? Would you be happy to make your decision exclusively on the basis of any of the perspectives? If not, why not, and what is missing?

Part 2 is worth 20 percent of the assignment grade. This is an opportunity for you describe how useful you think ethical theories are for making practical ethical choices, and even perhaps for the recognition that a choice has an ethical dimension. I am n ot expecting you to give a detached critique of each ethical theory or a comparison among them Ð as might be expected in a moral philosophy course. Rather, I am expecting a critique of the appropriateness and applicability of these ethical theories (and e ven ethical theories in general) in the context of the dilemma. You should be able to do this in a few paragraphs.

Part 3:

Irrespective of the perspectives that you have just considered, would you PERSONALLY accept the contract? Why or why not? If your answer is "it all depends", be very precise about what your decision would depend on. For example, would it depend on what ki nd of information the government wanted to filter? On the country? Why? In your answer, say what you would decide and how you would make the decision, not what you think a philosophy professor would want to hear. In particular, don't be embarrassed to app eal to your intuition or gut feelings if you think these are not treated seriously enough by theory. However, you must explain your decision and your reasons for it, and not merely say that it feels right.

Part 3 is worth 10 percent of the assignment total. I am only expecting a paragraph or two here, as you will probably want to justify your argument by referring back to points you have already made in Parts 1 and 2.

Notes on grading

I hope you will learn valuable insights from this activity, but the only ones that will affect your grades are the ones that you articulate clearly in writing. While grammar, spelling and style really do matter ("ethos", remember?) for this assignment, th ey will only affect your grade to the extent that they stop me from understanding what you are saying. But....

...I can only read what you wrote, not what you meant to say. If I misunderstand something or don't make a connection that you think should be obvious, that reflects much more on your responsibility as an author than on my responsibility as a reader.

Computing Implications Interview

t.b.a.