Post 1
Statement of Purpose
According to Aristotle, an action is ethical if it is indicative of well-developed ethical virtues such as courage, justice, and generosity. These virtues are the natural products of rational thought but also must be instilled in us from childhood through education and the development of habits. Every ethical virtue is an intermediate between two extremes of excess and deficiency - the “golden mean.” For example, a courageous person has found the perfect balance between cowardice, where one would run away from all challenges, and rashness, where one would charge forward irrationally. However, different circumstances call for different means, and there is no universal rule. Even so, there are some actions that Aristotle condemns unequivocally, such as adultery, theft, and murder. This notion of a mean state does not constitute a procedure for deciding whether an action is virtuous, because Aristotle does not provide one. Instead, he says that the mean state is a product of a reason and should be found by anyone who has been properly educated in ethics and is living ethically.
Aristotle argues that a virtuous person must evaluate how ethical an action is because virtuous activities are the only way to achieve the ultimate good or happiness. However, the virtuous do not experience a great deal of inner turmoil because they take pleasure in exercising their ability to reason and they are completely under the control of reason. People who feel inner turmoil but ultimately act ethically are known as “continent,” and those who succumb to internal pressures are called “incontinent.” These are not as blameworthy as giving in to vice completely, but also not as praiseworthy as embracing the virtues. Here Aristotle is focused on inner harmony, because he believes that is the best way to live. Even evil people will eventually regret their actions and find that their way of living is incorrect because unethical actions naturally create a lack of harmony within a person.
Aristotle writes that people have the predisposition to act ethically because, as mentioned above, it is the only way to achieve ultimate happiness and harmony with oneself. He says that we must act ethically because through small, individual good actions we can achieve the “highest good,” which he calls eudaimonia. He does not ask what exactly “good” actions are but instead argues that all good is in search of this highest good, and that eudaimonia has three characteristics: it is desirable for itself, it is not desirable for the sake of some other good, and all other goods are desirable for its sake. However, people do not do good in pursuit of some higher goal, and instead Aristotle argues that people strive for this goal because it promotes general well-being. Knowledge or a state of mind alone are not enough to achieve happiness, and ethical living through action is the only way to truly live well.
Three issues in computer technology that Aristotelian ethics would have a lot to say about are corporate ethical responsibilities, corporate malfeasance, and diversity issues. Aristotle believed that ethical living was the only way to achieve actual ultimate happiness, and in a world dominated by corporations, corporations acting unethically would break this notion considerably. A corporation is made up of rational human beings, and each of these human beings wants to live in a state of internal harmony. If these corporations act unethically, then the people inside them are acting unethically and therefore not living well. Aristotle would frown upon corporate malfeasance because it means succumbing to the pressures of the extremes rather than rationally choosing an intermediate. If a corporation began selling customer data for a profit without their consent, Aristotle would say that they are embracing the extreme of avarice rather than the “golden mean” of generosity. Similarly, diversity issues in computer science could indicate a lack of ethical behavior and therefore a lack of well-being.
IEEE Code of Ethics
The IEEE Code of Ethics outlines, in ten points, some basic guidelines for professionals. Primarily, the Code is focused on honesty and integrity, inclusion and cooperation, and preventing harm to any persons or their property.
Generally, Aristotelian ethics agrees with many of the points raised in the IEEE Code of Ethics. According to Aristotelian ethics, moral behavior is the mean between two extremes. One of the main “means” Aristotle discusses is that of honesty. Honesty is the mean between secrecy and loquacity and is evidently one of the primary focuses of the IEEE Code of Ethics. Almost half of the points in the Code ask professionals to be honest in their work. Similarly, inclusion and cooperation can be seen as the mean between exclusion and dependence on others.
Despite these similarities, however, the IEEE Code of Ethics is significantly different from what is put forth by Aristotelian ethics. First and foremost, the Code is very explicit on what it believes to be “moral” or “ethical” behavior, given that each of the points in the Code is explicitly promoting specific actions. Aristotelian ethics is less concerned with the specific actions of individuals than with the individual’s life as a whole. An individual was considered virtuous if they lived a virtuous life, generally pursuing the virtues, or moral means, in their actions. An individual was not immediately considering un-virtuous if a single action of theirs failed to be virtuous. The IEEE Code of Ethics seems to focus more on individual actions, promoting ones such as the rejecting of bribes, rather than on promoting the living of an overall virtuous life, as Aristotelian ethics does.
In accordance with the differences between the Code and Aristotle’s ethical framework, one thing that is missing from the Code that Aristotelian ethics might provide is a more general point. Rather than dictating specific actions that professionals must take to be “ethical”, Aristotelian ethics could add a point that simply dictates that all individuals should behave virtuously: always striving to live a virtuous life.
ACM Code of Ethics
The ICCP code of ethics consists of three sections centered around three different aspects of professional ethical behavior. The code as a whole focuses on the responsibilities of computing professionals to their particular organizations, to the computing community, and to the general public.
Ethics, for Aristotle, is an activity. Ethical behavior consists in the individual actively providing for the good of others, and especially use one’s power for the good of the general public. The ICCP code of ethics certainly agrees with this view. The very first point induces a member to work for the good of society as all people have a stake in computing. Similarly, the first rule for leaders in computing is to “ensure that the public good is the central concern in all computing work.” Neither framework claims to be a complete guide to decision making. In fact, both writings go out of their way to instruct the reader to take rules as precepts to be applied to individual setting.
That said, the ICCP code of ethics is built to apply specifically to the field of computing. As such, it speaks much more directly to the situations that might be encountered in the professional setting that it targets than Aristotle. In contrast, Aristotle’s ethics is geared towards achieving the highest good of man. It provides more general precepts around which a whole life is meant to be organized. This scope is much broader than the ICCP’s code of ethics.
While the ICCP code of ethics states clearly what professionals should do in their career capacity and in the scope of their membership in the institute, it has little to say about one’s life outside of this scope. For instance, there is little in the code of ethics that discusses virtues, like temperance, that only apply outside of work, but if not followed can infringe upon a professional work ethic.
ICCP Code of Ethics
The ACM code of ethics consists of four sections. Section one dictates ethical and moral imperatives that apply to one’s life, but also specifically to one’s work. Section two focuses on being a good employee and emphasizes keeping up to date with one’s competence at work. Section three is geared specifically towards leaders, and section four simply enforces the previous sections.
Aristotle would be most attuned to the first section, which prescribes a way to live ethically. Sections two, three, and four are not particularly relevant to this discussion as they are explicitly professional and Aristotle took a more holistic view to ethics. He is focused on living a full and virtuous life, so the general ethical rules are more in line with what he believes. The ACM code of ethics is more general than the other two codes because it includes lines such as “contribute to society and human well-being.” Aristotle would certainly agree with this point as this contribution would lead to a virtuous life. Aristotle’s ‘golden means’ are also visible in parts of the code such as “be honest and trustworthy.” In general, I don’t think Aristotle would disagree with the points presented in this code of ethics, but he would certainly believe they were incomplete.
The ACM code of ethics provides a few key ethical points, but does not provide a comprehensive rule set to live one’s life by. Aristotle would find these to be moral imperatives, which they are, and he would disagree with that form of ethics. Aristotle believes that logic and reason, as performed by a virtuous person, is the only way to discern whether an action is virtuous/ethical or not. Therefore, these imperatives are against what he believes to be the proper way to evaluate actions. While some of the imperatives in the first section would fall under the imperatives that Aristotle accepts, he would not like the format of this code because it does not involve reasoning on the part of the actor.
Aristotle can add a very simple thing to this code of ethics - rational thought. He would say there ought to be a focus on discerning whether or not an action is ethical. While the points presented in this code of ethics can be a set of guidelines to inform future decisions, there must be an emphasis on individual reasoning. Since Aristotle is concerned more about living a virtuous life than performing virtuously in a particular setting, like work, adding a section that prescribes discerning whether or not any action is ethical will push those who follow this code to change the way they act in general, thereby leading to living a virtuous life.