Applying the Ethical Analysis Process INFOST120 Shannon Crawford Barniskis, 2019 Tavani’s 3-step Process for Ethical Analysis 1. Identify features or practices that are controversial a. Look for hidden features with ethical implications b. Assess implications for relevant institutions, populations c. Determine if there are guidelines, laws, or professional codes, that can help, if not go to step 2 2. Analyze by clarifying concepts and situating the case in context a. Policy vaccum?? If a policy vacuum exists, go to step 2b, otherwise go to step 3. b. Clear up any conceptual muddles involving the policy vacuum. 3. Deliberate on the ethical issue a. Apply one or more ethical theories below b. Justify the position you reached by evaluating against the rules for logical/critical thinking. Deontology 1. What is the primary duty of those implementing the policy? Pick ONE duty, then consider an action to fulfill that duty. 2. Does implementing the policy violate the categorical imperative? a. Can it be universalized? b. Does it use people as a means to an end? 3. If the action violates 2a or 2b, it is NOT ethical under this framework. However, the duty remains, so one must find another way to fulfill it. Utilitarianism 1. What is the “greatest good” in this case? i.e. what OUTCOME maximizes happiness or goodness in the world? 2. For this class, I want you to ALWAYS keep eudaimonia in mind when considering the greater good–are you sure the greater good will be furthered? 3. Does the policy’s OUTCOME further the greater good/maximize happiness/further eudaimonia? If not, it is not ethical under this framework. Rawlsian Justice 1. Start from the Original Position behind the “veil of ignorance” 2. All rights ideally are distributed equally. Possible in this case? i.e. does someone get their liberties stomped on? 3. Does everyone have a fair shot at obtaining the advantage, or are some people structurally left behind? 4. ID which group is least well off in the case. 5. Identify if the action/policy/institution benefits the least well off. If not, it is not ethical under this framework. Ethics of Care 1. Determine Attentiveness: Who needs care? 2. Decide Responsibility & Competence: Are you able to provide care for them, both in terms of giving of yourself and in terms of your ability? 3. Decode Responsiveness: Do the people you think want to be cared for want your care? Be sure to assess the person’s vulnerability and inequality by listening to THEM, as opposed to imagining yourself in a similar situation. 4. Then decide, does the action taken or contemplated embody that caring? That is, does the act and the outcome embody the necessary care? How is caring best represented in this case? NOTE The ethical frameworks THEMSELVES are ethical (they are ETHICS) but the ACTIONS taken may not be ethical or moral when one applies a given framework. You will create an overview of each of four ethical theories in relation to a particular case, and assess the pros and cons of each theory in determining the ethics, and identify policy vacuum or any conceptual muddles. Details: Using the case that your house or group accessed in session 3.1, you will look at each of four ethical Frameworks, similarly to the way we did it in class on the ethical framework worksheet. You will look at deontology, utilitarianism, ethics of care, and Rawlsian justice. You will identify the factors at play: conceptual muddles, policy vacuums, or Faustian Bargains. Then for each framework you will look at the pros and cons of using that framework to determine the ethics of that case. You will do this as Tavani describes his method for assessing ethics. Describe which factors would be relevant to determining the ethical behavior in the case for each framework. For example if you are evaluating the case according to utilitarianism, what is the greatest good in this case? Or if you are looking at deontology, what is your duty? And how do you express that duty while keeping in mind the categorical imperative? What sort of care might be associated with the case? And who might be the group of people that is the least well off in the case? These are the types of factors you should consider as you write. The essay should be between 500 and 800 words. APA formatted in-text citations and reference list. The actual paper should just be an easy to read font such as Georgia, Gill Sans, Minion, etc. 12 point and either single or double spaced is fine. Please don’t put your name in the main text of the document. You will turn this assignment in on canvas in the appropriate drop box. This is the checklist/rubric by which we will be assessing the assignment: Checklist/Rubric for Ethical Theories Assignment • Introduces the case, including the Faustian Bargain(s) in this case, .25 pts. • Briefly notes any conceptual muddles and policy vaccum .25 pts. • o • Total out of .5 pts.______ Utilitarianism is discussed relative to the case, including: o Which “greatest good” has been identified as most relevant, .25 pts. o Lists at least one positive and one negative about using utilitarianism to assess the ethics of the case, .25 pts. o Makes SURE to keep eudaimonia in mind when making this assessment, .25 pts o Determines that the case is ethical or not ethical using utilitarian framework, .25 pts. ▪ • Total out of 1 pt.______ Deontology is discussed relative to the case, including: o Which “duty” has been identified as most relevant, .25 pts. o Discusses the categorical imperative (both the part about universality and using people as a means to an end), .5 pts. o Lists at least one positive & one negative about using deontology to assess the ethics of the case, .25 pts. o Determines that the case is ethical or not ethical using deontology, .25 pts. ▪ • Total out of 1.25 pt.______ Ethics of care is discussed relative to the case, including: o Notes what sort of care has been identified as most relevant, and for whom, .25 pts. o Determines whether the person doing the action or creating the policy/system able to provide care for them, both in terms of giving of yourself and in terms of their ability? .25 pts. o States whether the people you think want to be cared for want the proposed care? Be sure to assess the person’s vulnerability and inequality by listening to THEM, as opposed to imagining yourself in a similar situation, .25 pts. o Lists at least one positive and one negative about using ethics of care to assess the ethics of the case, .25 pts. o Determines that the case is ethical or not ethical using ethics of care, .25 pts. ▪ • Total out of 1.25 pts.______ The Rawlsian justice framework is discussed relative to the case, including: o Shows which group or groups have been identified as most likely to be the “least well-off”, .25 pts. o Shows whether people have a fair chance of obtaining the advantage, if there is one, .25 pts. o Lists at least one positive & one negative about using the Rawlsian justice framework to assess the ethics of the case, .25 pts. o Determines that the case is ethical or not ethical using the Rawlsian justice framework, .25 pts. ▪ Total out of 1 pt.______ Length: Is the essay fewer than 500 words? Subtract 1 point for every 0-100 words fewer than 500 (400-499=Subtract 1; 300-399=subtract 2; 200-299=subtract 3; and so on). Subtract___________ Spelling, grammar, or syntax errors, subtract 0.25 pts for each over 4. (each person gets 4 “free” errors, then they “cost” 0.25 pts each) Subtract___________ Muddled writing? Take 0.5 pts off for any individual instance of writing too muddled or confusing to understand. Subtract___________ Total points earned out of 5: ____________ INFOST 120: Information Technology Ethics Ethical Theories Worksheet 1. How would a Utilitarian address this problem? What factors would a Utilitarian consider, and what is the morally correct action to take from this perspective? 2. How would a Deontologist address this problem? What factors would a Deontologist consider, and what is the morally correct action to take from this perspective? 3. How would a Rawlsian address this problem? What factors would a Rawlsian consider, and what is the morally correct action to take from this perspective? 3. How would a Ethics of Care practictioner address this problem? What factors would a Ethics of Care practictioner consider, and what is the morally correct action to take from this perspective? Case 1 You find yourself at a Nazi rally in 1942 Germany, and you are in reach of Hitler, and you know of all of Hitler’s acts of atrocity. You have a clear chance to steal Hitler’s wallet, which contains 250 DM, the loss of which would bring him some grief. Your chance of being caught is less than 2%. Would you be ethically justified in stealing Hitler’s wallet? Alternatively, would you be justified in killing Hitler? Case 2 You are doing very well in class, but a friend is struggling. An exam is tomorrow, worth 40% of the grade. You promised your friend you would help him study this evening, as he needs a good grade in this class to keep his scholarship. On you way to his place, another friend invites you join your buddies for pizza and beer, and you owe them a round of drinks from the last time you were out. What do you do? Case 3 A billionaire has a warehouse full of vintage and expensive cars, but doesn’t drive them. You have always wanted one of the cars in his collection. If you steal it, the billionaire would not notice, nor really miss, the vehicle. You, however, would drive and enjoy it daily. Would you steal the car? INFOST 120: Information Technology Ethics Ethical Theories Worksheet 1. How would a Utilitarian address this problem? What factors would a Utilitarian consider, and what is the morally correct action to take from this perspective? 2. How would a Deontologist address this problem? What factors would a Deontologist consider, and what is the morally correct action to take from this perspective? 3. How would a Rawlsian address this problem? What factors would a Rawlsian consider, and what is the morally correct action to take from this perspective? 3. How would a Ethics of Care practictioner address this problem? What factors would a Ethics of Care practictioner consider, and what is the morally correct action to take from this perspective? Case 1 You find yourself at a Nazi rally in 1942 Germany, and you are in reach of Hitler, and you know of all of Hitler’s acts of atrocity. You have a clear chance to steal Hitler’s wallet, which contains 250 DM, the loss of which would bring him some grief. Your chance of being caught is less than 2%. Would you be ethically justified in stealing Hitler’s wallet? Alternatively, would you be justified in killing Hitler? Case 2 You are doing very well in class, but a friend is struggling. An exam is tomorrow, worth 40% of the grade. You promised your friend you would help him study this evening, as he needs a good grade in this class to keep his scholarship. On you way to his place, another friend invites you join your buddies for pizza and beer, and you owe them a round of drinks from the last time you were out. What do you do? Case 3 A billionaire has a warehouse full of vintage and expensive cars, but doesn’t drive them. You have always wanted one of the cars in his collection. If you steal it, the billionaire would not notice, nor really miss, the vehicle. You, however, would drive and enjoy it daily. Would you steal the car?