Objective midterm exam review

1. OBJECTIVE MIDTERM EXAM REVIEW

2.

AESTHETICS
ETHICS
METAPHYSICS
COSMOLOGY
PHILOSOPHY
Renaissance
ARTS
SCIENCES
SOCIAL SCIENCES
Studying the very basis of a subject is philosophy of
that subject, for example, philosophy of art, philosophy
of physics, philosophy of economics
HUMANITIES
PHILOSOPHY
ETHICS
WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY
GREEK ROOTS ---LOVER [PHILO]
WISDOM [SOPH]
PHILOSOPHY is—QUESTIONING
PHILOSOPHY is QUESTIONING/ CLARIFYING LIMITS/VERY BASIC TENETS
OF A SUBJECT

3.

WHAT IS ETHICS/morality
Standards that distinguish between right and wrong,
good and bad,
applied ethics studies ethical dilemmas, issues, and
questions as they arise in various practical or professional
contexts;
normative ethics studies general theories and principles of
ethics that can be applied to practical situations;
meta-ethics studies the meaning of ethical concepts, theories, and principles.

4.

WHY PHILOSOPHY FOR COMPUTER ETHICS
1. Ethics is not a science [no answers, just theories] so
branch of PHILOSOPHY
2. Philosophers never in it for the money—you get to see what
left wing folks think about business of technology.
3. Philosophers do logic—clear paths to discussion,
persuasion, and argumentation—giving you a voice
when you need to raise ethical issues
4. Teach you to QUESTION your own assumptions
about your ethics

5.

WHAT ETHICS IS NOT
ETHICS IS NOT LAW
Laws --standards of conduct enforced by power of government
• Laws usually reflect many of a society’s moral values.
• Laws give us society’s rules of ethical conduct..
• Laws can even change a society’s moral values
Laws, however, are not ethics
• Often, rules of law are a minimum of ethical conduct.
• Some actions may be legal but unethical
• Some actions may be ethical but illegal.

6.

WHAT ETHICS IS NOT
ETHICS IS NOT SOCIAL CODE
Relativism --ethical standards are relative to particular
societies or cultures.
Ethics is mere social convention or custom
BUT, ETHICS IS NOT
MERE SOCIAL CONVENTION OR CUSTOM.
• Relativism does not allow for a global human culture
• Relativism does not allow for ethical progress
• Relativism does not allow for criticism of one’s own
culture’s ethical practices

7.

RIGHTSa justified claim
to a certain kind of treatment from others
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)–
man in a state of nature has the right to do
what is necessary to protect himself and to get
what he can get however he can get it—every
man for himself.
But this is not a desirable life for most, so men
give up their natural right to those
[government.] who contract to bring peace and
protection.

8.

John Locke (1632-1704)
• In a natural state all were equal and independent,
and none had a right to harm another’s “life, health,
liberty, or possessions.”
• Humans in State of Nature are cooperative-opposite of Hobbes’ view.
• Also, Govt. does not over-ride society or individual
rights—govt. must be accountable.
• Property & value are created by LABOR.
– When we mix our labor with the natural world,
we blend part of ourselves with that labor—that’s
how we come to own property, ethically.

9.

RIGHTS a justified claim to a certain kind of treatment from others-Declaration of Independence—specifies
inalienable rights—to life, liberty and pursuit of
happiness.
Prima facie rights- some rights contradict, given
certain circumstances, and when this arises, some rights
become secondary and are then obviated
Rights entail duties. No duty, no right.
Human Rights --all human beings have some basic moral
rights—
•right not to be killed
•the right not to be harmed
•the right to liberty

10.

RIGHTS a justified claim to a certain kind of treatment from others-to help from others
or
to be left alone by others.
Positive rights
Negative rights
rights to have actions
done for us
rights to do whatever we want as
long as we do not violate
someone else’s rights. (just a few)
food
clothing
shelter.
Free speech
let alone in the bedroom
not to be spammed

11.

– Robert Nozick (1938-2002)
•—extreme LIBERTARIANS hold that no one has positive rights.
We only have the basic negative right to freedom from
coercion—the right not to be forced to do things against our
will.
•Only time we can rightfully be forced to do something against
our will is when we are forced to stop coercing others.
•But this extreme libertarianism fails to see that, given so much
freedom for everyone, then Hobbs’s state of nature would seem
to follow
•--one
person’s freedom usually restricts someone
else’s freedom

12. UTILITARIANISM

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)

13.

UTILITARIANISM--promote consequences that bring
the greatest good for the greatest number of people AND
the least harm.
Consequentialism—examines the ethical results
of an action, not the ethical mindset that caused
the action
-
Bentham--"the “pleasure principle"--the greatest
happiness of the greatest number-- is the
foundation of morals and legislation."
“The ability to suffer, not the ability to
reason, be the benchmark of how we treat
other beings.”

14.

John Stuart Mill--(1806-1873) – (like a son to Bentham)
introduces a distinction between lower and higher
pleasures—
”Better to a human miserable than a pig satisfied.”

15. Ethical Theories and Principles--UTILITARIANISM

Ethical Theories and Principles-UTILITARIANISM
RULE VS ACT UTIL.
act utilitarians-- consequences should
be judged for each case.
rule utilitarians--consequences should
be judged in terms of rules that can be
applied in general for similar cases.

16.

Ethical Theories & Principles-- KANTIAN ETHICS
Immanuel Kant—German philosopher 1724-1804
Non-consequentialist

17.

Background for Kant’s EthicsDavid HUME –British philosopher (1711-1776)
• Hume was a skeptic, he questioned everything.
• He maintained we have no good reason to believe
the sun will come up tomorrow.
• In ETHICS Hume maintained that there is absolutely NO
FACT we could learn about the world or about ourselves
that COULD TELL US WHAT WE OUGHT TO DO or
what we should VALUE.
• Nothing about the way the world IS can tell what we OUGHT
do. • This is known as the problem of ‘IS-OUGHT DERIVATION’
Kant’s ethics is an attempt to prove Hume wrong
Kant’s ethics is an ‘IS-OUGHT DERIVATION’

18.

KANT’S ‘IS-OUGHT DERIVATION’
Reason-Rationality is - THE BIG TRUTH about us,
the fact about us that counts
Given this fact, that humans are Rational beings,
does this tell us what we ought to do? If you are good at
logic puzzles you’ll be impressed by how he gets to ought.
How to get to OUGHT? He thinks about it quite a
bit, this is his life—and . . .
There is another truth to consider, what the word “OUGHT”
really means.
“OUGHT” means a rule you must follow.

19.

KANT’S CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE
CATEGORICAL means no exceptions
IMPERATIVE means command, absolute must
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE-- absolute must with no
exceptions
Since Kant is so into logic and
reason, THE categorical imperative is
a rule of logic and non-contradiction.

20.

categorical imperative. [version 1]
VERSION 1-- act so that the maxim for what you
do you could will as a universal rule.
Notice what he has done here. He takes the concept of OUGHT as a
rule that has to be followed, absolutely no exceptions, and he says, well,
that IS what we ought to follow --rules that no RATIONAL person could
disagree with—clever.
greatest moral good can be “nothing else than
the conception of law in itself,
EXAMPLE--if murder is okay in one case, could you make it a universal
rule? That means everyone one would murder everyone, always, but that’s
not possible—there wouldn’t be anyone around to keep it up
.EXAMPLE—if everyone lied all the time, then we’d all know they
always mean the opposite of what they say, so nobody could lie.

21.

KANT’S CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE --VERSION 2
VERSION 2 --treat all persons as ends and never merely as means
therefore
VERSION 2 treat all persons as ends and never merely as means
BUT be careful--almost impossible to prove version 2 as is
--you have to have a smoking gun
nothing can be called good without qualification except a good will
the good will—doing things out of sense of duty to do the right thing.

22.

Ethical Theories and Principles--JUSTICE
JUSTICE:-- treat equals equally, unequals unequally
3 FORMS OF JUSTICE
COMPENSATORY—fair compensation for loss due to wrong action of others.
RETRIBUTIVE—fair punishment or penalties for wrong-doers
• DISTRIBUTIVE-- fairly distribute social & economic benefits and burdens
DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE: distribute benefits and burdens equally.
EGALITARIAN-there are no relevant differences among people
Distribute benefits and burdens equally
ARISTOCRACY
Distribute benefits according to merit
CAPITALIST
distribute benefits and burdens according to work effort
distribute benefits and burdens according to productivity
distribute benefits and burdens according to market demands
SOCIALIST (work effort & productivity can also be socialist)
distribute benefits according to need
distribute burdens according to ability

23.

Ethical Theories and Principles--RAWLS
JOHN RAWLS--1921-2002
RAWLS CONTRACT THEORY –JUSTICE AS FAIRNESS
hypothetical imperative—suppose this—then we ought
Counterfactual-an imaginary situation used to persuade
in favor of a theory
RAWLS’ VEIL OF IGNORANCE
•Imagine a group of people assembled in a room to
create a goverrnment and laws
•Imagine also that everyone in this group has severe
amnesia and cannnot see themselves or others
•They also cannot feel themselves or others

24.

RAWLS’ ORIGINAL POSITION—a society that
doesn’t start w/ prejudice
—color-blind, class-blind, blind to educational
level, blind to gender, blind to sexual orientation,
blind to religious affiliation, blind to special needs,
Rawls maintains that if we made laws &
governments, or if we examined fairness under
this veil of ignorance, we would logically end up
with his system
Bridges ‘suppose’ to ought

25.

ORIGINAL POSITION-- Rational agents under a veil of ignorance
would agree to :
PRINCIPLE 1. Each person has equal RIGHT to most extensive
LIBERTIES compatible w/ liberties for all—(negative rights)
We’d be concerned that we all get enough basic freedom
PRINCIPLE 2. Distribute benefits and burdens so that both :
B. Offices and positions are open to all—EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
We’d be concerned that we have chance to having some control over what
happens—if we want to have that control
A. GREATEST BENEFIT possible arises for the least advantaged
We’d be afraid we might be the worst off, so we’d want to make those as
well off as we could
PRINCIPLE 1 over-rides PRINCIPLE 2-we’d be most concerned that we
get basic liberty
B over-rides A.—chance to improve –hope to rise above being at the vvery
bottom is more important than being a little better off at the very bottom.

26.

Non-consequentialist
Ethical Theories and Principles-- VIRTUE ETHICS
VIRTUE ETHICS we should develop good moral characters or work to
become virtuous people.
Some virtues— courage
humility
justice
honesty
patience
forgiveness
charity
loyalty
integrity.
Aristotle –Ancient Greek Philosopher
Aristotle’s ethics-- -virtues come from habithabit comes from-- education, training, and practice
ARISTOTLE’S GOLDEN MEAN --a balance between extremes
“a mean between 2 vices, one of excess and the other of deficiency”
Example—[reckless=excess of courage] & [cowardice=deficiency of courage]
Aristotle’s main virtues—justice, courage, temperance, and prudence

27.

Ethical Theories and Principles-- CARING ETHICS
CARING ETHICS--WEAK SENSE OF CARING
-our relationships with others bring special commitments
and regards.
COMMUNITARIANISM we need community and we have
responsibilities to our community.
Caring Relationships with individuals and with our
communities matter, and can outweigh rights and utility.
problem—fine line between favoritism/prejudice and
special commitments and regards for our caring
relationships

28.

Ethical Theories and Principles-- CARING ETHICS
-STRONG
SENSE OF CARING
Background
Hume—no facts about the world can tell us what we OUGHT DO.
NO BRIDGE FROM IS TO OUGHT
Kant’s categorical. imperative—attempt to bridge the isought gap
STRONG SENSE of caring –bridging is to ought
caring for others is the foundation for ethical principles and
theories.
For example,, we believe that people have the right to not
be murdered because when someone is murdered, our
‘hearts go out’ to them—we sympathize with the pain, the
needs, and the lives of others.

29.

STRONG SENSE OF CARING
We care about other human beings.
We need to care, and we need caring responses from others—
a fact about human nature—gives us ought- We ought to maximize happiness, observe rights and duties,
because we care
•Individuals need caring relationships and they need
communities, even in state of nature,
•So Hobbes’ view of state of nature is wrong.,
but
Our caring varies—some care more, some less .
Those who feel no such caring are missing the core of ethical
value
We sympathize more for strangers who are most vulnerable, or
most in need of caring from others.

30.

MARXISM (BACKGROUND)
Adam Smith-[1723–1790]
• market economy with law of supply
and demand is ethical
• utilitarian-everyone is better off• but capitalists use any non-capitalist
means to further their profit, breeding
monopolies
• making Smith wrong.

31.

John Locke( 1632-1704) MARXISM (BACKGROUND)
• Property and value are created by labor.
• When you combine your labor with raw
materials, something of you is in the product.
• Labor accounts for most of the property value of
an object,
• As long as you don’t waste this property, it’s
yours
• Money is durable property, doesn’t get wasted
• Property precedes government and government
cannot "dispose of the estates of the subjects
arbitrarily."

32.

Karl Marx(1818-1883)
A tree has value. We add value when we cut and
shape the wood—value added is labor value—
surplus value.
• Through labor the wood becomes something
different than a piece of a tree. It becomes art.
or a tool, or furniture, etc.
• Man’s labor in Capitalist society is seen as
just another form of raw material—like the
wood.
• But man’s energy and talent invested in that
wood is more than just raw material—it is a
part of the man himself—an extension of him.

33.

In Capitalism, Man’s labor is stolen. He works 10
hours and capitalist steals 5 of those hours—it’s how
capitalist turns a profit.
Machine makes labor more productive—where once it took
20 hours to make a shoe, with use of machines it takes 2
hours.
Worker is paid just what he needs to get by. He receives
none of the extra value from productivity of his work.
Machinery is used to distance man from his labor—
through assembly line, etc., he no longer can say—this is
my work—it is work of a team.
Because worker doesn’t own the machine or the raw
materials, he cannot directly claim the 5 hours extra that
the capitalist keeps.

34.

MARXISM
Man is alienated from his labor—someone
else takes his product—he is
dehumanized.
Whereas work was once skilled labor w/
obvious product—labor is now piecemeal
drudgery or capitalist manipulation of
humans (management etc.)
Because man’s labor is exploited—he
never gets what his labor is worth. He is
forced to work at alienating labor

35.

Frederick Engels (1820-1895)
• Engels , like Marx, predicts ever-increasing
role of machine used to steal labor
• Engels maintains that machine
development & production causes
supply/demand problems for capitalism
– Technological innovation creates an army of
unemployed
– An army of unemployed means fewer who can
afford the goods the capitalist produces—
supply of products increases but demand for
products falls

36.

• ENGELS describes the booms/busts we have
become so familiar with in Silicon Valley.
– The whole industrial and commercial world,
production and exchange among all civilized peoples,
are thrown out of joint about once every 10 years.
– Commerce is at a stand-still
– the markets are glutted
– products accumulate
– hard cash disappears
– credit vanishes
– factories are closed
– bankruptcy follows upon bankruptcy
– the mass of the workers are in want of the means of
subsistence, because they have produced too much
of the means of subsistence;. The stagnation lasts for
years

37.

Engels predicts ever-increasing role of
machine to transform the conditions that
allow for liberation from capitalism and
proprietary machine ownership
Engels predicts government eventually
will evolve into a worker-owned state—
advanced government allows for end of
private property
– State interference in social relations becomes,
in one domain after another, superfluous, and
then dies out of itself; The State is not
"abolished". It dies out

38.

• In the end, when the state and
capitalism are abolished, we will have a
world where overseeing of technology
and technologically-driven distribution
of goods will be the pattern of society
– The government of persons is replaced
by the administration of things, and by
the conduct of processes of
production.

39.

No way to know when the state/economy
has reached critical point
No way to know when or if successful
revolt will take place or is needed
– Worker-run state might naturally evolve as
technology and production reach the point
where the middle-man of capitalism just is no
longer necessary.
No way to know when technology
reaches limit of theft