ICT – Ethical Theories

Introduction

It involves application of four theories of ethics which are mentioned below over a case study. 

• Consequence-based ethical theory (Utilitarianism)
• Duty-based ethical theory (Deontology)
• Rights-based ethical theory (Social contract)
• Virtue-based ethical theory (Character)

In this essay, a proper comparison of the ethical theories has been given so that we can relate the theories and their impact on ICT. ICT is a vast field.

Purpose of the Essay

All the theories mentioned above were discussed in this paper and later on they were used for the purpose of understanding its relevance and impact on ICT and how they relate to professional code of ethics. We have used the case of carbon tax because ICT industry is responsible to produce carbon dioxide in the environment. Government has introduced carbon tax on the ICT industry and now it will be reviewed that is the carbon tax comes also covers the aspects of ethical theories? If it covers then at what extent it is related to ethical theories and whether it is introduced keeping in view the ethical theories mentioned above.

Utilitarianism V/s Deontological

The consequences (outcomes achieved) of actions and policies provide the ultimate standard against which moral decisions must be evaluated (Tavani, p. 50).

Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) was one of the first philosophers to formulate utilitarian ethical theory.

Utilitarianism has two main principles:

1. The principal of social utility.
2. The belief that social utility can be measured by the amount of happiness produced.

The moral value of actions and policies should be measured in terms of their social usefulness (Antony 1979).

On the other hand, theories in which duty and obligation form the basis for morality are called deontological theories.

Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) argued that morality must be grounded in the concept of duties and obligations that individuals have to one another and not the consequences of human actions.

Morality does not have anything to do with the amount of happiness produced or achieving desirable consequences. Kant’s duty-based ethical theories are in direct contrast to Bentham’s consequence-based utilitarian ethical theories (Roger 1995).

Kant argues that humans have a rational nature that separates them from other kinds of creatures. Humans have the ability to reason, reflect, deliberate and make moral choices. Kant also argues that each individual has the same moral worth and that all individuals are ‘ends in themselves’ and not ‘means to an end’.

For the past two centuries, utilitarian consequence-based ethical theories and duty-based deontological ethical theories have received the most attention from ethicists and philosophers. However, other kinds of ethical theories have recently begun to also receive serious attention. 

Rights-based ethical theory (Social contract) V/s Virtue-based ethical theory (Character)

Contract-based ethical theory involves a moral system whereby certain contractual agreements exist between individuals.

Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1670) developed one of the earliest versions of contract-based ethical theories. Hobbes describes a pre-moral state that he calls the ‘state of nature’ where there are no moral or legal rules yet in existence and individuals are free to act in ways that meet their natural desires. Hobbes further describes this pre-moral state of nature as ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.’

 

 

Rights-based ethical theories are closely associated with social-contract ethical theories.  Whether or not individuals have any legal rights, all humans have certain moral or natural rights.

Thomas Aquinas (1225 – 1274) believed that humans possess natural rights (e.g., life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as asserted in the USA Declaration of Independence). These rights are classified as ‘inalienable’ and ‘self-evident’.  However, such rights need to be guaranteed and protected by the state via explicit, identified legal rights. Legal rights are grounded in ‘positive law’ or civil law whereas moral or natural rights are not.  Legal scholars and philosophers identify two kinds of legal rights:

1. Negative rights:

The right not to be interfered with in carrying out the privileges associated with the particular right concerned.

2. Positive rights:

Positive rights are very rare and are far more controversial than negative rights. These are rights that individuals/citizens have a right to be provided with. E.g., Universal access to education and healthcare (Bruce 2005).

Virtue ethics or character ethics ignores the special roles that consequences, duties and social contracts play in moral systems, especially with respect to determining the appropriate standard for evaluating moral behavior. Virtue ethics focuses on the character development of individuals and their acquisition of good character traits Plato and Aristotle introduced the fundamentals of virtue ethics 2,500 years ago. Virtue ethics has gained current respect among ethicists as a viable contemporary theory due to the work of Alasdair MacIntyre (1981).  Aristotle believed that ethics was a ‘practical science’ and something to be lived and practiced – individuals had to develop certain virtues (strengths and excellences) in order to become a moral person.

Virtue ethics focuses largely on character development and moral education and does not rely on a system of formal rules as required in utilitarian and deontological ethical theories. A moral person is one who is disposed to do the right thing (Tom1991).

How will the carbon tax affect IT industry?

A carbon tax is a tax on sources that emit carbon dioxide. An ethical approach to action on climate change (i.e. dumping Carbon-dioxide into the atmosphere) is very clear. This pollution must be stopped to protect innocent people and our future generations. Different people have different opinion on the carbon tax. The Australian government page provides a summary of the pros and cons of the tax (“Carbon taxes”, 2010).

“Like most business sectors, the IT industry consumes energy to run its day-to-day operations and as such will be impacted by the introduction of the carbon tax,” commented Kareem Tawansi, CEO of software development provider, Solentive Software. “As the increased cost of energy is passed down to consumers, this will mean that it will become more expensive for Australian IT businesses to establish or continue running operations such as datacenters in Australia. The impact of this tax may force many cloud vendors to move their datacenter operations offshore,” continued Kareem (Tawanski, 2011). “However this should force all companies to understand what they are paying in energy costs for IT and put in place techniques and practices to reduce energy consumption for more efficient data centers or consider alternatives, such as outsourcing of data centres, managed services and cloud computing” (Winterford, 2011).

The concept of carbon tax is good effort in minimizing the impacts of industries on the environment by the Australian government.  The carbon tax is the tax on the sources that emit excessive carbon dioxide. The industries responsible for emissions beyond the threshold limit will have to pay carbon tax for it. For this purpose the countries are divided in to Annex I and Annex II. Though countries of Annex I are responsible for more emissions but they pay the tax in the form of carbon credits given to the Annex II countries for cutting down their emissions to neutralize the emissions being emitted by Annex I countries. Though it will lessen the impacts on the environment but the Annex II countries do not get the carbon credits on time and this is making this process complicated. But the Australian government here is following the ethical egoism according to the Annex II countries’ perspective. As they are not cutting their own emissions; though one of the greater emitter and on the other hand promoting their technology that will be given to the Annex II countries for cutting down their emissions and this technology will be bought through carbon credits that is also given by Australian government or Annex I countries. But according to Annex I countries this action will benefit everyone both environment and other party i.e. the Utilitarian approach.