Identifying 3 Virtues Relevant to the Analysis of the Specific Ethical Question
1. Identify 3 virtues relevant to the analysis of your specific ethical question. Define each virtue in no more than one sentence.
2. Discuss the morality of the act central to your ethical question by comparison with your 3 chosen virtues.
3. Apply Kant’s categorical imperative by completing the following tasks. You need to support any yes/no answers with relevant discussion.
- Define a specific rule which authorises the act central to your ethical question. (2 marks)
- Define the general rule which authorises the act central to your ethical question. (1 mark)
- Is the general rule inherently self-contradictory? Why or why not?
- Does the general rule violate Kant’s practical imperative or any of Kant’s other absolute moral rules? (2 marks)
- Is the general rule contrary to its fundamental purpose?
- Is the act ethical according to Kant’s ethical system?
4. Provide an ethical conclusion by comparing your conclusions from the act utilitarian analysis in Assignment 1, your virtue ethics and Kantian analyses in this assignment, and drawing on your own ethical conscience.
The 3 virtues relevant to the specific ethical question are
- Respect- Respect can be considered to be of great importance in day to day life of individuals.
- Responsibility: It is worth noting that Responsibility to be perceived as a virtue requires excellence and expertise in the exercise of moral judgment and actions.
- Consideration: It is to be mentioned that in order to act in an ethically responsible manner individuals need to be considerate of the feelings of others.
Morality means the extent to which an action is right or wrong.
The morality of the three virtues chosen above can be discussed as follows:
- Respect- It can be mentioned that individuals are taught to respect, teachers, family, rules of the society, cultural traditions and the rights and feelings of other individuals since childhood. Individuals since childhood are taught that all individuals are worthy of respect. The idea of respecting one’s job and relationship has been inculcated by the society into the minds of individuals since a very early age. However, jobs and relationships turn foul if people start to disrespect them. In this context, it can be said that collecting personal information by social media companies results in violation of the respect people have for the social media companies, whom people trust enough to share their personal information with. Thus, it is evident in this case that act of collecting personal information of the users is immoral.
- Responsibility – Being responsible while discharging the duties of individuals involves many interrelated skills, dispositions and motives. Some of the skills required to act in a responsible manner include skill to make a moral evaluation of the actions of individuals, skill in moral decision making and the skill to respond creatively to the perceptions of moral needs or problems of people. In this given context, it can be inferred that social media companies have certain responsibilities in relation to keeping the personal information of its users private and confidential. However, collecting personal information of the users results in violation of the responsibilities the social media companies have to its users and therefore such act can be considered to be immoral.
- Consideration – Individuals are required to choose their words wisely so as be considerate to the feeling and sentiments of other people. In this context, it is essential to evaluate whether the actions of the social media companies have any consideration for the feelings and rights of the users. It is evident in this given scenario that collecting personal information of the users by the social media companies is breach of the trust and the respect. Therefore, it can be inferred that the social media companies have no consideration for the aforementioned virtues as discussed above.
Kant imperative theory says that morality of action does not depend on consequences but it depends on whether you have fulfilled your duties (Lazari-Radek, 2017). You should act the way you want others to act towards all other people and follow it as it is a universal law.
- The specific rule which authorizes the ethical question is that you should act the way you want others to act towards you and it should become universal law. This means that social media companies should act in a way that does not harm anybody’s privacy and security keeping the same if done to them in mind They should act in a manner that others should follow them(DeMers, 2017).
- The general rule which authorizes ethical question is that rightness or wrongness of an act does not depend upon the consequences but it depends on whether you have fulfilled your duties or not. So, in connection to the ethical question it can be said that working of social media companies does not depend on consequences but it depend on whether they have fulfilled their duties and it is there duty to protect the security and privacy of users. For that social media companies should collect only that much information which is necessary and it should not harm the security and privacy of individuals.
- Yes, the general rule is self-contradictory as it says the rightness or wrongness does not depend on consequences rather it depends upon fulfillment of duties. But while performing an activity everyone tries to fulfill his duties to the maximum but whether he has performed good or bad depends upon the results(Grassegger, 2017). So general rule is self-contradictory as we cannot judge an activity without knowing the consequences.
- Kant practical imperative declares that an action or inaction to be necessary or not. Yes, general rule violates the Kant practical imperative theory as the general rule says the rightness or wrongness of an activity depends upon fulfillment of responsibilities not on consequences whereas practical theory describes that the action should be performed or not depends upon its effect or consequences(Hautala, 2016). Practical imperative theory says that one should treat oneself and others as an end and never as a means which means that in order to get benefit from others they should not be used as a means rather they should be treated with humanity.
- Yes, the general rule is contrary to the fundamental purpose. The fundamental purpose of any activity performed is to know the consequences whether it has been performed right or wrong and what is its effect so that it can be reviewed in future. But according to general rule the only thing to be considered is fulfillment of duties not the consequences(Tuten, 2017). Without considering the consequences it is not possible to judge that an activity is right or wrong as everybody fulfill his responsibilities to the maximum on their part. So it violates the fundamental rule
- Ethical system of Kant says that one should always respect humanity. Everybody should be treated equally irrespective of their interest and desires. It also says that correctness of action does not depend upon consequences rather it depends on fulfillment of duties and these duties should be performed in a manner that it becomes a universal law. Any of the acts should not harm humanity. Yes, the act is ethical if performed keeping in mind that it should not violate rules and should not harm humanity. If social media companies collect information keeping in mind that it should not harm the privacy of individuals in other words not harm humanity then it is ethical. Another thing is if prior permission is taken before sharing any information and proper rules are followed to avoid security breach then it is ethical.
Ethical Conclusion-: keeping in mind the virtues, Kantian analysis and conclusion from assignment 1 it can be said that social media companies should be able to collect personal information of users keeping in mind that it should not harm humanity in any manner. They should collect only that much information which is necessary and is not harming the privacy of users and is not harming humanity. If in any case it requires collecting more information than it should not disclose to anybody without permission and use that information keeping in mind that if same thing is done to him. In order to avoid security breach proper laws and policies should be framed to avoid theft and fraud. Without permission nothing should be shared with marketers as it harms the privacy and humanity which is against law.
Al – Kuwari, A., 2018. Privacy Concerns in Social Media. Qatar Foundation Annual Research Conference Proceedings, 5 April. p.1103.
BBC News2016, 2016. ID thieves ‘hunting’ on social media. [Online] Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36701297 [Accessed 25 April 2018].
Cohen, S., 2016. Privacy Risk with Social Media. [Online] Available at: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-cohen/privacy-risk-with-social-_b_13006700.html [Accessed 24 April 2018].
DeMers, J., 2017. Does Your Social Media App Know Too Much About You. [Online] Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaysondemers/2017/01/23/does-your-social-media-app-know-too-much-about-you/2/#125ee2a6534e [Accessed 25 April 2018].
Grassegger, H.&.M., 2017. The data that turned the world upside down. [Online] Available at: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/mg9vvn/how-our-likes-helped-trump-win [Accessed 25 April 2018].
Hautala, L.&.R., 2016. Yahoo sets hack record at 1 billion accounts’. [Online] Available at: https://www.cnet.com/news/yahoo-hack-1-billion-users-affected-2013-record/ [Accessed 25 April 2018].
Lazari-Radek, K.&.S.P., 2017. Utilitarianism: A Very Short Introduction. In Utilitarianism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
Tuten, T.&.S.M., 2017. Social media marketing. [Online] Available at: https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=XQg_DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT15&dq=Tuten,+TL+%26+Solomon,+MR+2017,+Social+media+marketing.+Sage.&ots=tPa_wS3nrF&sig=n4QxbiAC-NKFMB1rAjRsAUQ88aU#v=onepage&q&f=false [Accessed 25 April 2018].
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
