|
Consequences of Computing:
A Framework for Teaching
Principles and Skills Underlying the Social and Ethical Dimensions - Page 21 of 36
[EP3] Ethical choices cannot be avoided. Many students think that ethical choices are
irrelevant to a computer science or engineering discipline, and that it is their job simply to
do their employer's will. Careful ethical thought involves recognizing that one cannot abandon
responsibility simply by saying that one has. Courts of law, the military code, and many
professional societies' codes do not allow this sort of moral retreat, and computing
professionals should be aware of its dangers. We enter the realm of ethical choice in design
any time we make decisions that (1) affect people and (2) are not completely constrained by
mathematics or physics. Ethical reflection should begin with the assumption that all design
and implementation involves value choices.
This principle is best taught in technical classes, where the ethical dimension of design and
implementation decisions can be pointed out. Students will best realize that their discipline
is fraught with ethical choices if they confront them in what they consider the "real work" of
their discipline. This does not mean that they need to spend extraordinary time pondering
ethical dilemmas during the database class. It does mean they should recognize that databases
often contain sensitive information about people, and that the choices they make in designing
one can help or hurt those people.
[EP4] Some easy ethical approaches are questionable. Students need to become aware of
the differing grounds for ethical claims that have become common, and of the significant
weaknesses of those often put forward in defense of an ethical choice. Though most students
will not recognize the jargon, they are likely to recognize the differences between ethical
reasoning based on the outcomes of action (consequentialism) and ethical reasoning based on
duty or rights alone (deontological reasoning). However, unless they are familiar with the
different tacks these lines of argument are likely to take, they may never consider alternative
reasons when they hear only one form. For example, many arguments about property are based on
the consequences we might suffer if we ignored it, but there are compelling arguments based in
concepts of rights or duties as well. In a situation where it seems the best outcome can be
had by ignoring property rights, it would be good if computing professionals had some practice
thinking about this issue in terms of duty or of rights rather than simply "the greatest good."
Similar examples can be found in all the other ethical issues.
|