3 ms·

Yes, it applies to every ethics code. I picked medical ethics because it's typically the most respected, and I had a fun rebuttal to it. Checklists augment hum

by chroma 12y ago

Yes, it applies to every ethics code. I picked medical ethics because it's typically the most respected, and I had a fun rebuttal to it. Checklists augment human memory, preventing people from forgetting parts of frequent, repetitive tasks. I don't think people forget parts of their ethics often. They might "cheat" a little for impulsive decisions, but that's the extent of it. If you spend weeks applying, interviewing, and accepting a position making malware at a company, it says a lot about you as a person. That's where the vast majority of malware comes from, not otherwise ethical people who sometimes backslide.

meowface 12y ago
Would it maybe be better to show numerous case studies in ethics classes? Instances where some person or team or organization thinks they're doing something good or "not that bad" which ends up having very negative consequences? I think that would drive a stronger message than a silly written code; it could also encourage people to potentially escape groupthink, question decisions, and whistleblow bad behavior when they've exhausted other options. Obviously there are people out there who will never care about making ethical decisions, but I think there are situations where an otherwise ethical person might do something unethical without being aware of it. Malware doesn't count, since obviously no ethical person would do that (excluding arguments about intelligence agencies and warfare...), but a good target audience might be engineers working on software that has the potential to infringe privacy.
- tjl 12y ago
  The engineering ethics classes I know about basically look at case studies. You get taught various philosophical ethics systems (e.g., utilitarianism) and then examine a situation, a proposed action and whether that action is ethical. If it isn't, suggest a new ethical action instead. You examine the action based on the different ethical systems. Deciding actions based on consequences is utilitarianism, which is only one ethical system. There's a number of other systems. For instance, one could have a set of rules that they follow (e.g., always tell the truth), but that could result in negative consequences.
  - scarmig 12y ago
    Deciding actions based on consequences is consequentialism, not utilitarianism. You can just as easily have an ethical system that says an action is moral if if furthers the interest of the race, or if it saves the planet, or if it furthers your self interest, or whatever. Utilitarianism is simply a form of consequentialism which can be (kinda sorta) reduced to "an action is ethical if it maximizes society's global utility function." Well, except for rule utilitarianism, which on one level is anti-consequentialist (though on other levels it's still deeply consequentialist).
    - tjl 12y ago
      I agree. I guess it wasn't clear, but I was talking about deciding if an action is moral based on good consequences is utilitarianism. I thought it would be clear in the context of the comment I replied to, but I should have made it clear. Rule utilitarianism has some things in common with deontology, but it's quite different in others.

by chroma 12y ago

meowface 12y ago

Would it maybe be better to show numerous case studies in ethics classes? Instances where some person or team or organization thinks they're doing something good or "not that bad" which ends up having very negative consequences? I think that would drive a stronger message than a silly written code; it could also encourage people to potentially escape groupthink, question decisions, and whistleblow bad behavior when they've exhausted other options. Obviously there are people out there who will never care about making ethical decisions, but I think there are situations where an otherwise ethical person might do something unethical without being aware of it. Malware doesn't count, since obviously no ethical person would do that (excluding arguments about intelligence agencies and warfare...), but a good target audience might be engineers working on software that has the potential to infringe privacy.

tjl 12y ago
The engineering ethics classes I know about basically look at case studies. You get taught various philosophical ethics systems (e.g., utilitarianism) and then examine a situation, a proposed action and whether that action is ethical. If it isn't, suggest a new ethical action instead. You examine the action based on the different ethical systems. Deciding actions based on consequences is utilitarianism, which is only one ethical system. There's a number of other systems. For instance, one could have a set of rules that they follow (e.g., always tell the truth), but that could result in negative consequences.
- scarmig 12y ago
  Deciding actions based on consequences is consequentialism, not utilitarianism. You can just as easily have an ethical system that says an action is moral if if furthers the interest of the race, or if it saves the planet, or if it furthers your self interest, or whatever. Utilitarianism is simply a form of consequentialism which can be (kinda sorta) reduced to "an action is ethical if it maximizes society's global utility function." Well, except for rule utilitarianism, which on one level is anti-consequentialist (though on other levels it's still deeply consequentialist).
  - tjl 12y ago
    I agree. I guess it wasn't clear, but I was talking about deciding if an action is moral based on good consequences is utilitarianism. I thought it would be clear in the context of the comment I replied to, but I should have made it clear. Rule utilitarianism has some things in common with deontology, but it's quite different in others.