Ethics and Information Technology

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 121–130 | Cite as

The role of pragmatic arguments in computer ethics

Article

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to stress the importance of pragmatic arguments if we are to reach overlapping consensuses across cultural and disciplinary borders. An analytical distinction is made between, on the one hand, arguments based on socio-political or philosophical presuppositions, and on the other hand, pragmatic arguments. The latter are (as far as possible) detached from culture-specific or disciplinary presuppositions. I will mainly focus on the issue of regulation and surveillance on the Internet, and put forward a selection of pragmatic arguments for why widespread regulation and surveillance ought to be avoided. These arguments are intended to reach the same conclusion as arguments that are based on socio-political and philosophical presuppositions, with the aim of creating overlapping consensuses.

Keywords

cross-cultural e-commerce innovation Internet technology layers principle overlapping consensus pragmatic arguments regulations surveillance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. T. Dinev, M. Bellotto, P. Hart, V. Russo, I. Serra, and C.␣Colautti. Internet Users’ Privacy Concerns and Beliefs About Government Surveillance – An Exploratory Study of Differences between Italy and the United States. Journal of Global Information Management, 14(4): 57–93, 2006Google Scholar
  2. L. Floridi (1999) Information Ethics: On the Philosophical Foundation of Computer Ethics. Ethics and Information Technology 1:37–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. L. Floridi (2002) On the Intrinsic Value of Information Objects and the Infosphere. Ethics and Information Technology 4:287–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. K. Gorniak-Kocikowska (1996) The Computer Revolution and the Problem of Global Ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics 2:177–190Google Scholar
  5. L.P. Hartman. The Rights and Wrongs of Workplace Snooping. Journal of Business Strategy, 19: 16–20, 1998Google Scholar
  6. G. Huston (2000) The Future for TCP. The Internet Protocol Journal 3(3):2–26Google Scholar
  7. M. Levander. Singapore to Relax Censorship Laws as It Seeks to Expand Internet Access. Wall Street Journal, September 1: A18, 1996Google Scholar
  8. B.G. Norton (2000) The Cultural Approach to Conservation Biology. In: J. Benson (ed) Environmental Ethics: An Introduction with Readings. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. J. Rawls (1996) Political Liberalism. Colombia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. L. Solum and M. Chung. The Layers Principle: Internet Architecture and the Law. Public Law and Legal Theory␣Research Paper 55, University of San Diego School of Law [Retrieved October 1, 2004, from http://www.ssrn.com/abstract=416263]Google Scholar
  11. C. Sunstein (2001) Republic.com. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  12. H. Tavani (2002) The uniqueness debate in computer ethics: What exactly is at issue, and why does it matter? Ethics and Information Technology 4: 37–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. The Congressional-Executive Commission on China. Freedom of Expression, Speech, and the Press [Retrieved September 10, 2005, from http://www.cecc.gov/pages/virtualAcad/exp/]Google Scholar
  14. J. Wang. The Internet and Ecommerce in China: Challenge of the WTO. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Advances in Infrastructure for e-Business, e-Education, e-Science, e-Medicine on the Internet, 2003 [Retrieved October 5, 2005, from http://galeb.etf.bg. ac.yu/∼vm/cd1/papers/93.pdf ]Google Scholar
  15. Wikipedia. Blocking of Wikipedia in Mainland China [Retrieved 19 November, 2005, from http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Blocking_of_Wikipedia_in_mainland_China]Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations