Discourse ethics for computer ethics: a heuristic for engaged dialogical reflection
- 614 Downloads
Attempts to employ discourse ethics for assessing communication and information technologies have tended to focus on managerial and policy-oriented contexts. These initiatives presuppose institutional resources for organizing sophisticated consultation processes that elicit stakeholder input. Drawing on Jürgen Habermas’s discourse ethics, this paper supplements those initiatives by developing a more widely usable framework for moral inquiry and reflection on problematic cyberpractices. Given the highly idealized character of discourse ethics, a usable framework must answer two questions: (1) How should those who lack organizational power (e.g., concerned citizens, students) conduct their moral inquiry under non-ideal conditions of discourse? (2) How ought they to understand the moral force of the judgments they reach under such conditions? In response, I develop the heuristic implications of Habermas’s principle of universalization. To render that principle usable for non-ideal discourse, I propose a modification that yields a scalar measure of “dialogically robust” judgments that are responsive to the actual state of discussion. To illustrate the use of these principles, I sketch two case studies, which examine the moral acceptability of violent video gaming and government cyber-surveillance.
KeywordsAppraisal Computer ethics Discourse ethics Dialogue Habermas Universalization
I thank Garth Hallett and Erin Chambers for their feedback on earlier versions of this paper. I also thank Professor Chambers and the Computer Ethics class (Saint Louis University, Spring 2014), whose discussion of issues and case studies in this paper has shaped my analysis.
- Administration White Paper. (2013). Bulk collection of telephony metadata under section 215 of the USA Patriot Act. http://perma.cc/8RJN-EDB7?type=pdf. Downloaded 28 June 2014.
- Alexy, R. (1990). A theory of practical discourse. In S. Benhabib & F. Dallmayr (Eds.), The communicative ethics controversy (pp. 151–190). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Apel, K.-O. (1980). Towards a transformation of philosophy. (G. Adey and D. Frisby, Trans.). Routledge and Kegan Paul: London.Google Scholar
- Benhabib, S. (1992). Situating the self. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Birrer, F. A. J. (2001). Applying ethical and moral concepts and theories to IT contexts: Some key problems and challenges. In R. A. Spinello & H. T. Tavani (Eds.), Readings in cyberethics (pp. 91–97). Boston: Jones and Bartlett.Google Scholar
- Bushman, B. J. (2013). Don’t buy your kid Grand Theft Auto V for Christmas. Huff Post Tech, 13 Dec 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-j-bushman/dont-buy-your-kid-grand-theft-auto-v-for-christmas_b_4440477.html. Accessed 19 Feb 2014.
- Clarke, R. A., Morell, M. J., Stone, G. R., Sunstein, C. R., & Swire, P. (2013). Liberty and security in a changing world: Report and recommendations of the president’s review group on intelligence and communications technologies. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2013-12-12_rg_final_report.pdf. Downloaded 21 June 2014.
- ESBR (2014a) ESBR ratings guide. http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.jsp. Accessed 5 August 2014.
- ESBR. (2014b). Principles and guidelines for responsible advertising practices. http://www.esrb.org/ratings/principles_guidelines.jsp. Accessed 5 August 2014.
- Gellman, B., & Poitras, L. (2013). U.S., British intelligence mining data from nine U.S. Internet companies in broad secret program, Washington Post, 7 June 2013. www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html. Accessed 20 June 2014.
- Gorban, S., & Barrett, D. (2013). “NSA violated privacy protections, official says.” Washington Post, 10 Sept 2013. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324094704579067422990999360. Accessed 21 June 2014.
- Greenwald, G. (2014). No place to hide. New York: Metropolitan-Henry Holt.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J. (1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action. (C. Lenhardt and S. W. Nicholsen Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J. (1993). Justification and application. (C. Cronin Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms. (W. Rehg Trans.). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Habermas, J. (1998). The inclusion of the other. (Ed.) Cronin, C., & De Greiff, P. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Harty, J. M. (1911). Probabilism. In Catholic encyclopedia (Vol. 12, pp. 441–446). New York: Robert Appleton.Google Scholar
- HLR. (2014). Recent administration white paper. Harvard Law Review, 127, 1871–1878.Google Scholar
- Kant, I. (1994). Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals. In Kant (Ed.), Ethical Philosophy (2nd ed.), (J. W. Ellington Trans.). Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
- Kirk, M. (director) (2014) The United States of secrets. Frontline, 2 parts, May 15, May 20, 2014.Google Scholar
- Lanier, J. (2014) Should Facebook manipulate its users? New York Times, 1 July 2014, A17.Google Scholar
- McCarthy, T. (1998). Legitimacy and diversity: Dialectical reflections on analytic distinctions. In M. Rosenfeld & A. Arato (Eds.), Habermas on law and democracy (pp. 115–153). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Medine, D., Brand, R., Cook, E. C., Dempsey, J., & Wald, P. (2014). Report on the surveillance program operated pursuant to section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. 2 July 2014. http://www.pclob.gov/All%20Documents/Report%20on%20the%20Section%20702%20Program/PCLOB-Section-702-Report.pdf. Accessed 4 July 2014.
- Mingers, J., & Walsham, G. (2010). Towards ethical information systems: The contribution of discourse ethics. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 833–854.Google Scholar
- Moor, J. (1999). Just consequentialism and computing. Ethics and Information Technology, 1, 65–69.Google Scholar
- Rehg, W. (1994). Insight and solidarity. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Rehg, W. (2003). Discourse ethics. In E. Wyschogrod & G. P. McKenny (Eds.), The ethical (pp. 83–100). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Rollins, J. W., & Liu, E. C. (2014). NSA surveillance leaks: Background and issues for Congress. In S. Cepeda (Ed.), NSA intelligence collection, leaks, and the protection of classified information (pp. 1–27). NY: Nova.Google Scholar
- Sanger, D. E. (2014). Sky isn’t falling after Snowden, N.S.A. chief says. New York Times, 30 June 2014, A1, A13.Google Scholar
- Schiesel, S. (2011). Supreme court has ruled; now games have a duty. New York Times, 28 June 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/29/arts/video-games/what-supreme-court-ruling-on-video-games-means.html. Accessed 11 July 2014.
- Tavani, H. T. (2011). Ethics and technology. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Wellmer, A. (1991). Ethics and dialogue: Elements of moral judgment in Kant and discourse ethics. In D. Midgley (Ed.), Persistence of modernity (pp. 113–231). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Wong, P.-H. (2012). A Walzerian approach to ICTs and the good life. Journal of Information, Communication, and Information in Society, 10(1), 19–35.Google Scholar
- Yetim, F. (2011). Bringing discourse ethics to value sensitive design: Pathways toward a deliberative future. AIS Transactions On Human-Computer Interaction, 3(2), 133–155.Google Scholar