CSC410 - Professional

Practices in IT
Instructor Name : Sidra Nasir
Today Topics
• Kantianism
• Virtue Ethics
• Comparing Workable Ethical Theories
Kantianism
Critical Importance of Good Will

• Good will: the desire to do the right thing

• Immanuel Kant: Only thing in the world that is good
without qualification is a good will
• Reason should cultivate desire to do right thing
Categorical Imperative
(1 Formulation)
st

• Act only from moral rules that you can at the same
time will to be universal moral laws.
Illustration of 1st Formulation
• Question: Can a person in dire straits make a
promise with the intention of breaking it later?
• Proposed rule: “I may make promises with the
intention of later breaking them.”
• The person in trouble wants his promise to be
believed so he can get what he needs.
• Universalize rule: Everyone may make & break
promises
• Everyone breaking promises would make promises
unbelievable, contradicting desire to have promise
believed
• The rule is flawed. The answer is “No.”
A Quick Check
• When evaluating a proposed action, reverse roles
• What would you think if that person did the same
thing to you?
• Negative reaction → evidence that your will to do
that action violates the Categorical Imperative
Categorical Imperative (2nd
Formulation)
• Act so that you treat both yourself and other people
as ends in themselves and never only as a means to
an end.

• This is usually an easier formulation to work with

than the first formulation of the Categorical
Imperative.
Kant: Wrong to Use Another
Person Solely as a Means to an
End
Scenario
• Carla is a single mother who is working hard to complete her
college education while taking care of her daughter. Carla has
a full-time job and is taking two evening courses per semester.
If she can pass both courses this semester, she will graduate.
She knows her child will benefit if she can spend more time at
home. One of her required classes is modern European history.
In addition to the midterm and final examinations, the
professor assigns four lengthy reports, which is far more than
the usual amount of work required for a single class. Students
must submit all four reports in order to pass the class. Carla
earns an A on each of her first three reports. At the end of the
term, she is required to put in a lot of overtime where she
works. She simply does not have time to research and write
the final report. Carla uses the Web to identify a company that
sells term papers. She purchases a report from the company
and submits it as her own work.
• Was Carla’s action morally justifiable?
Plagiarism Scenario
• Carla
– Single mother
– Works full time
– Takes two evening courses/semester
• History class
– Requires more work than normal
– Carla earning an “A” on all work so far
– Carla doesn’t have time to write final report
• Carla purchases report; submits it as her own work
Kantian Evaluation (1st
Formulation
• Carla wants credit for plagiarized report
• Rule: “You may claim credit for work performed by
someone else”
• If rule universalized, reports would no longer be
credible indicator’s of student’s knowledge, and
professors would not give credit for reports
• Proposal moral rule is self-defeating
• It is wrong for Carla to turn in a purchased report
Kantian Evaluation (2nd
Formulation)
• Carla submitted another person’s work as her own
• She attempted to deceive professor
• She treated professor as a means to an end – End:
passing the course – Means: manipulate professor
• What Carla did was wrong
Case for Kantianism
• Aligns with common moral concern: “What if
everyone acted that way?”
• Produces universal moral guidelines
• Treats all persons as moral equals
Perfect and Imperfect Duties
• Perfect duty: duty obliged to fulfill without exception
– Example: Telling the truth
• Imperfect duty: duty obliged to fulfill in general but
not in every instance
– Example: Helping others
Case Against Kantianism
• Sometimes no rule adequately characterizes an
action
• Sometimes there is no way to resolve a conflict
between rules
– In a conflict between a perfect duty and an
imperfect duty, perfect duty prevails
– In a conflict between two perfect duties, no
solution
• Kantianism allows no exceptions to perfect duties
• Despite weaknesses, a workable ethical theory
Virtue Ethics
Critique of Enlightenment
Theories
• Utilitarianism, social contract theory ignore
important moral considerations
– moral education
– moral wisdom
– family and social relationships
– role of emotions
• Virtue ethics
– arete, virtue, excellence: reaching highest potential
– Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics (4th century BC)
Virtues and Vices
• Two types of virtue
– intellectual virtues: virtues associated with
reasoning and truth
– moral virtues: virtues of character (e.g., honesty)
• Moral virtues
– developed by habitually performing right action
– deep-seated character traits
– disposition to act in a certain way and feel in a
certain way
Aristotle: Happiness derives from living a
life of virtue.
Summary of Virtue Ethics
• A right action is an action that a virtuous person,
acting in character, would do in the same
circumstances.
• A virtuous person is a person who possesses and
lives out the virtues.
• The virtues are those character traits human beings
needs in order to flourish and be truly happy.
Vices
• Vices are opposite of virtues
• Vice: a character trait that prevents a human being
from flourishing or being truly happy
• Often, a virtue situated between two vices
– Courage between cowardliness and rashness
– Generosity between stinginess and prodigality
Case for Virtue Ethics
• It often makes more sense to focus on virtues than
obligations, rights, or consequences
• Personal relationships can be morally relevant to
decision making
• Our moral decision-making skills develop over time
• With this theory there are no irresolvable moral
dilemmas
• Emotions play an important role in living a moral life
Case Against Virtue Ethics
• Reasonable people may disagree on character traits
needed for human flourishing
• Cannot use virtue ethics to guide government policy
• Virtue ethics undermines attempts to hold people
responsible for their bad actions
• Despite weaknesses, virtue ethics a workable theory
Comparing Workable Ethical
Theories
Objectivism vs. Relativism

 Objectivism: Morality has an existence outside the

human mind
 Relativism: Morality is a human invention
 Divine command theory, ethical egoism,
utilitarianism, social contract theory, and virtue
ethics examples of objectivism
Workable Ethical Theories
• We seek theories with these characteristics:
– Based on the ethical point of view
– Objective moral principles developed using logical
reasoning based on facts and commonly held values

Workable ethical theories

– Kantianism
– Act and rule utilitarianism
– Social contract theory
– Virtue ethics
Comparing Workable Ethical Theories
Morality of Breaking the Law
Social Contract Theory Perspective

• Everyone in society bears certain burdens in order to

receive certain benefits
• Legal system supposed to guarantee people’s rights
are protected
• Everything else being equal, we should be law-
abiding
• Should only break law if compelled to follow a
higher-order moral obligation
Social Contract: A Prima Facie
Obligation to Obey the Law
Kantian Perspective
• Everyone wants to be treated justly
• Imagine rule: “I may break a law I believe to be
unjust”
• If everyone acted according to this rule, then laws
would be subverted
• Contradiction: Cannot both wish to be treated justly
and allow laws to be subverted
Rule Utilitarian Perspective
• What would be consequences of people ignoring
laws they felt to be unjust?
• Beneficial consequence: Happiness of people who
are doing what they please
• Harmful consequences: Harm to people directly
affected by lawless actions, general loss of respect
for laws, increased burden on criminal justice system
• Harms greater than benefits
Act Utilitarian Perspective
• Possible to conceive of situations where benefits of
breaking law exceed harms
• Suppose give penniless, bedridden friend copy of CD
• Friend benefits by $15 (value of CD)
• I benefit by $10 (satisfaction of helping friend)
• Harms of $0 (no lost sale, no police involvement)
• With $25 of benefit and $0 of harm, action is
determined to be good
END OF LECTURE