Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Critique of Positive Responsibility in Computing

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It has been claimed that (1) computer professionals should be held responsible for an undisclosed list of “undesirable events” associated with their work and (2) most if not all computer disasters can be avoided by truly understanding responsibility. Programmers, software developers, and other computer professionals should be defended against such vague, counterproductive, and impossible ideals because these imply the mandatory satisfaction of social needs and the equation of ethics with a kind of altruism. The concept of social needs is debatable with no one possessing the authority to impose their version of them. Similarly, the notion of “positive responsibility” is difficult to apply, does not effectively change computing practice, and confuses good (i.e., efficient) computer engineering with good (i.e. moral) computer engineering.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I mean by self-interest something roughly coterminous with Aristotle’s eudaimonia in the Nicomachean Ethics—a full and active life according to reason and virtue, or in other words, our true self interest. See [24].

  2. I generally prefer to avoid hypothetical cases when real cases are available. But, Gotterbarn makes too much of this case to avoid it.

  3. This appears to be Gotterbarn’s paraphrase of Nissenbaum [1, p. 114]. I am unable to find the quotation in Nissenbaum’s article [27].

References

  1. Gotterbarn, D. (2004). Informatics and professional responsibility. In T. W. Bynum & S. Rogerson (Eds.), Computer ethics and professional responsibility (pp. 107–118 [p. 108]). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Originally in (2001) Science and Engineering Ethics 7, 221–230.

  2. Gotterbarn, D. (1991). Ethical considerations in software engineering. In International conference on software engineering; proceedings of the 13th international conference on software engineering (pp. 266–274). Los Alamitos, CA, USA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

  3. Gotterbarn, D. (1995). The moral responsibility of software developers: Three levels of professional software engineering. The Journal of Information Ethics, 4.1, 54–64. Resource document. Donald Gotterbarn. http://www.csciwww.etsu.edu/gotterbarn/. Accessed 12 July 2006.

  4. Gotterbarn, D. (2000). You don’t have the right to do wrong! Resource Document. Donald Gotterbarn. http://www.csciwww.etsu.edu/gotterbarn/. Accessed 12 July 2006.

  5. Bynum, T. W. & Rogerson, S. (Eds.) (2004). Computer ethics and professional responsibility. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

  6. Fieser, J. (2006). Ethics. Resource document. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/ethics.htm#SSH1b.i. Accessed 14 March 2008.

  7. Author unknown. (2003). Altruism. Resource document. The free dictionary. Farlex. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/altruism. Accessed 28 March 2008. Quoted from (2000) The American heritage dictionary of the English language, 4th ed. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

  8. Comte, A. (1973 [1852]). The catechism of positivism religion. Clifton, NJ: Augustus M. Kelley; quoted by Machan, T. (2006). Two philosophers skeptical of negative liberty. Resource document. Ludwig Von Mises Institute. http://www.mises.org/journals/scholar/Machan8.pdf. Accessed 21 July 2006.

  9. Rand, A. (1961). The virtue of selfishness. New York: Signet.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rachels, J. (2003). The elements of moral philosophy (4th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  11. IEEE-CS/ACM Joint Task Force on Software Engineering and Professional Practices. (1999). The software engineering code of ethics and professional practice. In T. W. Bynum & S. Rogerson (Eds.) (2004), Computer ethics and professional responsibility (pp. 170–178). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

  12. Task force for the revision of the ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. (1992). The association for computing machinery code of ethics and professional conduct. In T. W. Bynum & S. Rogerson (Eds.) (2004), Computer ethics and professional responsibility (pp. 179–187). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

  13. Australian Computer Society. (2004). Australian computer society code of ethics. In T. W. Bynum & S. Rogerson (Eds.) (2004), Computer ethics and professional responsibility (pp. 188–191). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

  14. The unanimous declaration of the thirteen colonies of the United States. Resource document. U.S. History.Org. http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm. Accessed 22 July 2006.

  15. Friedman, M. (1991). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In D. Johnson (Ed.), Ethical issues in engineering (pp. 78–83). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. For further discussion see [name and title omitted for review].

  16. Mitchell, P., & Larsen, T. (2006). U.S. socially responsible investment assets grew faster than rest of investment world over the last decade. Resource document. Social Investment Forum. http://www.socialinvest.org/areas/news/2005Trends.htm. Accessed 14 Aug 2006.

  17. Drutman, L. (2006). Recommended reading. Resource document. Citizen works. Review of D. Vogel (2005) The market for virtue. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. http://www.citizenworks.org/news/index.php?id=216. Accessed 28 July 2006.

  18. Hakim, D. (2002). Ford stresses business, but disappoints environmentalists. New York Times (p. C4). Cited in D. Vogel (2005). The market for virtue (p. 122). Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

  19. Firmage, D. A. (1991). The definition of a profession. In D. Johnson (Ed.), Ethical issues in engineering (pp. 63–66). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline & punish: The birth of the prison (trans: Sheridan, A.). New York: Vintage.

  21. Foucault, M. (1988). Madness & civilization (trans: Howard, R.). New York: Vintage.

  22. Author unknown. (1998). A science odyssey: people and discoveries. J. Robert Oppenheimer. Resource document. WGBH, Pbs.org. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/baoppe.html. Accessed 28 March 2008.

  23. Voltaire [Arouet, F.]. (2005 [1759]). Candide: Or optimism. Resource document. Literature.org. http://www.literature.org/authors/voltaire/candide/chapter-30.html. Accessed 19 March 2008.

  24. Aristotle (1985). Nichomachean ethics (trans: Irwin, T.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.

  25. Ladd, J. (1991). The quest for a code of engineering ethics: an intellectual and moral confusion. In D. Johnson (Ed.), Ethical issues in engineering (pp. 130–136). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Rand, A. (1994). The fountainhead. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nissenbaum, H. (1994). Computing and accountability. Communications of the ACM 37, 73–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Freeman, R. E. (2002). Stakeholder theory of the modern corporation. In T. Donaldson, P. Werhane, & C. Cording (Eds.), Ethical issues in business; a philosophical approach (7th ed., pp. 38–48). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

  29. Goodpaster, K. (2002). Business ethics and stakeholder analysis. In T. Donaldson, P. Werhane, & C. Cording (Eds.), Ethical issues in business; a philosophical approach (7th ed., pp. 49–60). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

  30. Author unknown. (2008). Business stakeholders: British Telecom. Resource document. Tutor2u.net. http://www.tutor2u.net/business/accounts/stakeholder_theory.htm. Accessed 28 March 2008.

  31. Rhode, L. (2000). BT sues prodigy over U.S. hyperlink patent. Resource document. Infoworld. http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/00/12/15/001215hnbtprodigy.html. Accessed 28, March 2008.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper is heavily indebted to the generous reviewers at Science and Engineering Ethics including as always Stephanie Bird.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of English, Drexel University, 5th Floor MacAlister Hall, 3141 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    James A. Stieb

Authors
  1. James A. Stieb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James A. Stieb.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stieb, J.A. A Critique of Positive Responsibility in Computing. Sci Eng Ethics 14, 219–233 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-008-9067-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-008-9067-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation