Final Exam
1. The obvious, ethics-aside, answer would be: Wyatt owes Jasmine this much. However, the large road block in making this decision black and white is the policy that his company has set forth about hiring spouses, it simply can’t happen. There are many factors driving this decision: the economy in recession, the decline of Jasmine’s company and growth of Wyatt’s, the weight Wyatt’s recommendation holds within the departments of his company, and the fact that Jasmine does not have Wyatt’s last name despite their marriage.
To address my first answer, Jasmine has been pulling Wyatt out of the fire seemingly their entire young lives together. In high school she was involved in saving his grade, she also got him an interview at the job he works at now. Wyatt owes her his efforts in getting her into his company, but is it moral to get her in by lying to his coworkers. Immanuel Kant argues that morality is grounded in the sense of duty and obligation one human has to another. It’s very apparent that Wyatt has an obligation to Jasmine, not only as his wife, but as someone who has gone out of her way to help him in many previously similar situations. However, Wyatt also has an obligation to the company that hired him to work within the boundaries and rules they set and he agreed to. This is a flaw in Kant’s theory of Rule Deontology as there is no way to resolve a conflict between two obligations. This renders Deontology as no help to their decision.
Contractually, Wyatt is bound to the rules set forth by his company by accepting the position. For that reason, Jasmine does not have the ‘negative right’ to apply to the open position, as the company can then interfere citing the aforementioned rule. She can also not expect Wyatt to help her, as this would become a ‘positive right’, this putting Wyatt against the rules of his company.
Maybe the company is in the wrong for blocking Jasmine from applying. The rule could be unnecessary and unethical. However, the only reason the company would create a policy like this, is because at one point a policy such as blocking spouses from being hired is that it was needed before. While many technical systems are a policy vacuum, as we don’t always find adequacy in establishing policies for them, this dilemma is a physical problem where a previous issue could have called for this rule to be established.
However, according to Gert’s Moral System, the company’s policy does not apply to the four main features of a moral system. The policy is obviously public to all its members, as Wyatt knows this will inhibit him from aiding his wife. The rule is established based of rational reasoning that is apparent to all members. The rule is also impartial as it applies to any person or group who wishes to work for the company. However, the rule is not informal, unwritten, or flexible in any way. The rule, as well as I’m sure the other rules of the company, are fixed in place as the company’s “legal system”. I do not, personally, believe this one deviation from Gert’s system is enough to deem the establishment of this rule unmoral as the other three features are perfectly sound.
While it is unfortunate that Jasmine is in this situation, Wyatt’s hands are tied when it comes to providing her any aid in this scenario. I don’t think all hope is lost, however. The company’s rule, to my understanding, only prohibits Wyatt from hiring, or having any direct role in the hiring of his wife. I see no reason why Jasmine can’t apply for the job on her own accord. Once the question of their marriage arises, Jasmine can tell the truth and express her emphasis on professionalism. She shows moral courage by saddling up and telling the truth despite her fear of rejection. Her different last name, the separation from her husband’s department, and her being forefront in revealing the truth may be enough displays of professional focus for her to get the position despite the policy. I suggest they go forward with this method to act ethically toward the company in respect of their rules.
2. There are three main theories that can shed light on what is a relatively dangerous situation that this prison guard has been subject to. Utilitarianism, deontology, and contract ethics all display different views on why and how the guard should react when faced with this deadly dilemma. His life, the life of his coworkers, and more centrally, the life of the prisoner are at stake. Each theory puts larger emphasis on the dangers that each face, and distribute them variably.
Utilitarianism argues that it is the consequences of the greatest number of individuals, or the majority, in a given society that deserve consideration in moral deliberation. There are two possible “majorities” in this problem, the lives of those in danger from the attacking mod (guards and coworkers), and the public as a whole. If the guard released the prisoner, the immediate workers in the prison would be safe from harm as the mob would leave with what they came for. Unfortunately, the prisoner would die, which leads to the problem that now faces the second majority. If the guard gives in to their demands, the strength of the justice system would essentially be eliminated. Groups across the nation would know that they could obtain and murder a prisoner if they show enough force to the man at the front door. Criminals and workers at prisons nationwide would now be at risk.
Deontology deals with the factors that weigh in on the guard’s decision. Act Deontology would point the guard to weigh the life of the criminal in comparison to the lives of his coworkers. He then would need to decide, based solely of those two factors, which he valued more. Rule Deontology would emphasis that the prisoner is an ends-in-himself, and should not be treated as a solution to the problem at hand. With this in mind, the guard should act on the principle which supports this description.
Contract-based ethics is a little hazier, however, it stands nonetheless. The prisoner has a negative right to a fair trial in our court system, as is stated in our Constitution. However, in this situation, the once negative right becomes a positive right as it is now up to the guard to protect the prisoner in assurance that he survives long enough to see his court date. This right cannot remain negative as it is being interfered with and requires outside help from the guard.
Personally, I believe that Utilitarianism shows the guard the magnitude of problems that could arise from him releasing the prisoner. He removes harm from his coworkers but puts prisoners and guards across the nation in danger, as it has now become apparent that revolts get you what you want. He must have faith that they are fortified and prepared enough to handle the mob until help arrives. Act deontology would suggest that the prisoner be offered to the mob, as the lives of his coworkers outweigh the single life of the prisoner. Rule deontology says quite the opposite, where the prisoner is a means by himself, and should not be treated as a solution to the danger that faces them. The two conflicting deontological theories do not help our decision at all. Contract based ethics highlights the guard’s duty, as well as his coworkers, to protect the prisoner’s right to a fair trial, as was promised to him by law. Based off the theories of Utilitarianism and Contract-based ethics, the guard must protect the life of this prisoner alongside his coworkers.
3. Whistle-blowing has ramifications that affect everyone involved. By definition, whistle-blowing Attracts attention to a negligent, illegal, unethical, abusive, or dangerous act that threatens the public interest. It can affect the whistle-blower, the company’s reputation, the jobs of all who work for the company, the shareholders, and all those who use the product. In this case, the whistle-blowing would be due to immoral and potentially illegal acts
In this scenario, the woman working for your company has been secretly blowing the whistle on your company for actions in which she found immoral and wrong. This was first discovered when newspapers from the local area and nationally began publishing articles of a very detrimental nature towards the company. What made it more difficult of a situation was that the detrimental information was all true, leading company executives to believe that someone on the inside is feeding the newspapers information. However, the woman showed no indication that revealing this information would in any way correct the problem she saw occurring, nor did she in any way bring her concerns up to her supervisors, which according to Dr. George, does not give her justification to blow-the-whistle. The woman has gone against multiple company policies despite her reasoning for whistle-blowing being correct.
While whistle-blowing can be of an ethical or immoral reason, it can also be because of illegal reasons as well. This woman has broken many company policies stating that she is in the wrong by providing commercial information to these newspapers without the overseeing of an authorized company official. As she has revealed this to me, I feel it is my duty to blow the whistle to my company for her actions. She has broken rules that she agreed to upon hiring and she deserves the punishment that comes with the breaking of each of them.
It is apparent to me personally, that the woman skipped telling her supervisors about the issue and skipped trying to make a difference because she is hungry for the attention she will receive from the media and what she can potentially swindle out of the company. I do not believe that she did everything to justify blowing the whistle on the company she belongs to. The company can always change its policies in the country for which it works, but the change could have all started with informing supervisors of what you believe was being done wrong.
In keeping with Dr. George’s criteria for justified whistle-blowing, I feel as a strategic planner, who knows the identity of the whistle-blower, it is my duty to report (blow the whistle) on the woman within my department. Contract-based ethics, more specifically the social-contract theory, says it should be in our best interest to develop a moral system with rules. The company has established these rules to make sure employees to take all personal and commercial information to the press for their own benefit. The woman in the department has broken this moral system, as she has made no efforts to try and resolve the problem within the company, instead she has chosen a path of harm and destruction towards the company and her colleagues. The best decision for me would be to report her to my supervisors will all information she told me, and let them find the best course of action for her.
4. Ethics is the set of ideas that we have as we live with other people in a society. Ethics is more of an understanding rather than hard written rules. People who live in the same society, as ethics itself is a set of principles, standards and beliefs, accept being ethical. Ethics is a branch of philosophy, which standardizes and requires the concept of right or wrong to the people within a society. Ethics plays a major role in the field of information systems and those who are a part of this field. Cyber ethics is the study of moral issues involving cyber technologies. Cyber ethics is the set of rules that defines the rights and wrongs in the field of information technology and information systems. As cyber technology progressed and social media and other cyber technology platforms grew, they brought up new ethical issues and a great deal of debates.
When a person is considered a professional, they usually have special knowledge and training to be in that particular field. The common law requires professionals such as accountants, doctors, truck drivers, lawyers, engineers, etc. to have advanced training and experience in order to be a part of these fields as their actions are constantly affecting other people. Professionals need to have the ability to make a decision or judgment when doing their work. All professionals need to stay up-to-date with their fields as most fields are changing at a fast rate as technology continues to grow and advance.
Information systems is a part of information technology therefore professionals and specialist in that field must go through training that qualifies them to be a part of the field. So they know the rules and regulations when joining and making decisions in their respective fields.
Even though each field has different sort of standards for being ethical, there should not be an ethical standard dividing professionals and non-professionals. Although people working in the field of IT are not considered as professionals by common law, IT workers are still part of a professional industry, which specializes on a customer base, which ranges from the government to the private sectors. Professionals in IT field are held to a standard and have the same ethical responsibilities as individuals who are not in the field of IT. Regardless of profession, being fair and honest should be a standard for all individuals regardless of profession. Yes, some have a higher standard of responsibility than others might but overall everyone should know when one is being ethically right or wrong. However, there should not be a separate category of professional ethics, because all the individuals should be ethical regardless of what position they are in and what position they hold.
In 1999, Gotterbarn came up with the idea that software engineers have significant opportunities to do the following: the software engineers can do good or cause harm, enable others to do good or case harm, or influence others to do good or cause harm (Arizona University, n.d.). All three of these things, according to Gotterbarn, can cause serious harm to a large number of people and have a bigger impact that would not have been as big if computers were not available. With the misuse of air traffic control planes can be diverted and/or caused to crash and by hacking of the New York Stock one can cause serious harm to the economy. These two examples can be linked to what Gotterbarn talks about.
Comparing to engineers who are recognized as professionals by the government, IT professionals help do good by ethically maintaining systems of people who are controlling the air traffic. IT professionals are also helping the New York Stock Exchange by controlling their systems. These very same professions can be the reason why a pilot can crash the plane or why stocks of huge corporations can be dumped and their private/secretive information made public.
Also, IT engineers should obtain the certification to let people know they have the appropriate skill sets to perform certain tasks. These two requirements for engineers would reduce the malpractice of IT engineers.
The role of ethics can be very big when it comes to cyber technology because you are connected with almost everybody in the world virtually. There are many positive and negative effects of cyber technology when it comes to ethics. Technology has connected us from just one location of the world to the whole world on earth, it is dangerously scary that one could be clicking a button on his or her computer and it can have a positive or negative affect on someone who lives in a different part of the world. Cyber ethics is the study of moral issues involving cyber technologies. One of many positive effects of cyber technology is that it has made life easier, we can quickly send an email to each other or have meeting online through webcam, cyber technology has made a big impact in the world positively.
Although cyber technology has a lot of positive affects there are many negatives such as effects of increased Internet security on privacy and cyber ethics to privacy and loss of personal data. If one does not use the internet responsibly such as failure to control unauthorized access to sensitive information like credit cards or personal information they could be harmed through hackers and if they are at work and not being safe they could potentially endanger the company and damage the corporation’s reputation. The power of Internet means we can remain connected to anyone at all times regardless of distance, and since everything online can be anonymous the Internet has individuals lacking education in cyber ethics an encourages improper use or behavior.
Cyber Bullying is another big effect of technology and this is also involved in cyber ethics because some people do not think they are physically doing any harm when they harass or insult people online but it has such bad impact on society. Nowadays you are literally connected with the internet almost always, and in this new generation kids are connected at ages young as 4 to 5 years old and this is very dangerous because they have no clue in the world how dangerous the internet can be.
Ethics continues to play an important role in the world of information systems as the field continues to grow as technology also increases. As technology is increasing new ethical issues about its use are constantly being raised. As technology is making the world smaller in terms of communication and trading, almost everybody is affected by technology. The growth of technology can do great harm to the society. Therefore, it is important to have some sort of ethics when being connected with the cyber world.