Ethics and Technology paper
shadow291c
CASESTUDYANDFINALPAPERSTEP3.docxSTEP III: CASE STUDY AND FINAL PAPER STEPS
This step involves assessing the ethical frameworks studied at the start of the term in relation to your chosen ethical issue for the case study and final paper. Be sure to go through each thoroughly; scroll down to cover each of the following sections:
A. Consequentialism (Utilitarian) Theory B. Deontology Theory C. Kant’s Categorical Imperative Principle D. Social Contract Theory E. Virtue Ethics Theory
A. UTILITARIAN THEORY --- good for the group or majority, least harm for the group or majority.
Major ethical dilemma question: Should we be okay with our personal information be collected and stored?
Interpretation of the above analysis:
1. Which alternative results in the least harm in answering the dilemma yes or no? Why? (There is no right or wrong choice. Interpret the outcome of the analysis.) For example: the answer to the question would result in the least harm would be … because …. .
The answer to the question would be NO because it produces harm to consumers/users
The answer to the question that would result in the maximum benefit would be No, because the majority isn’t benefiting, only the minority.
Conclusion of analysis: the results from #1 and #2.
3. Therefore, based on the above analysis, the utilitarian’s position on this dilemma would be ….
The Utilitarian theory on this dilemma would be a no
B. DEONTOLOGY THEORY – Rights Violated/Duties Neglected
Major ethical dilemma question : Should we be okay with our personal information be collected and stored?
Interpretation of the above analysis: In deontology analysis, do the following the above chart:
1. Identify which stakeholders’ rights have been or may be violated/abridged.
Consumers/Users
2. Identify what duties have been or may be neglected.
Privacy
3. Remember: When listing a right, show its corresponding duty and vice versa. Final outcome of interpretation: How would you interpret the outcome of the deontologist’s position on your dilemma?
No
C. KANT’S CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE – Respect and consistency towards all
The principle of consistency: what if everyone acted this way?
Would be chaos
The principle of respect: Are people treated as ends rather than means?
Yes, viewed as a gold mine
Major ethical dilemma question: Should we be okay with our personal information be collected and stored?
Interpretation of the above outcome: 1. If a stakeholder is being treated differently, they are also being treated disrespectfully. 2. If identified stakeholder is a criminal or participating in criminal behavior, they cannot be treated disrespectfully.
Final outcome of above analysis:
Which alternative is preferable? What would be Kant’s position to your dilemma?
No, no he wouldn’t not everybody is being treated the same way, so he would be against it.
D. SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY – Negative and Positive Rights
Major ethical dilemma question: Should we be okay with our personal information be collected and stored? Interpretation of above analysis:
1. Does the ethical question results in negative rights being identified? Yes or Now? How?
No
2. Does the ethical question results in positive rights being identified? Yes or Now? How?
No
Final outcome of analysis: Is the social contract theory applicable to your ethical question? How? Why?
Yes it is, social contract theory could be a solution to the problem.
E. VIRTUE ETHICS THEORY – Morality through Character
Major ethical dilemma question: Should we be okay with our personal information be collected and stored?
Interpretation of above analysis: 1. Does answering the ethical question “yes” results in a virtuous action by a stakeholder? If that is the case, list the stakeholder and state how their actions are virtuous.
no
2. Does answering the ethical question ‘no” result in a virtuous action by a stakeholder? If that is the cse, list the stakeholder and state how their actions are virtuous.
Yes
Final outcome of analysis:
3. Explain the results (yes or no) to the ethical dilemma question that identifies stakeholders acting virtuous in this issue/situation.
None would result in a virtuous action by a stakeholder.
