Ethical Issues with Wearable Technologies
Our world today is heavily dependent on technology more so real-time systems that constantly monitor our daily activities including behavioural elements such as our moods. This over-reliance leaves us heavily exposed as our daily activities literary depend on these technologies (Baron 2014). Now, consider the wearable technologies such as bracelets that monitor our fitness endeavours or even our locations. To some level, they are helpful as they facilitate functions that would otherwise not be possible, however, what is the extent of their usability? Moreover, there are those who might use them to track others like governmental organisations or even a more basic example aggrieved spouses.
Wearable technologies are supposed to enhance the engagement or collaboration between human beings and technology. In essence, they provide an extended accessibility to technological resources. However, away from the hype and vast interest are serious ethical dilemmas and issues. For one, users have unsolicited access to video and picture capture facilities that can record any content at any given time. In the past, before the invention of smart devices it was hard to find people taking pictures in public and when they did to most of them it felt invasive. However, gone are those days and now people will record each and every event including accident incidences that otherwise would call for other actions (Tnooz 2014). Furthermore, there are those who use these devices to spy on others which seriously infringes on their privacy, security and intellectual property rights.
Utilitarianism
Information is seen as a source of power more so, in the current world characterised by a digital era unlike any other seen before. Wearable technologies have an abundance of information, from people’s schedules to their heart rates among other sensitive information. Therefore, these devices are reliable sources of information that can shape societies based on how they are used. Utilitarianism is one of the classical theory that defines an action or outcome as ethical if the results of the said action are good or moral. A wearable device has good intentions i.e. to advance our technological capabilities and also to expand our understanding of the modern world. Moreover, they help track our variable resources as well monitor the sick (Lacewing 2014). However, what is the outcomes?
For one, the society has lost its interpersonal skills as a whole where people are constantly glued to their devices and are fulfilled by online systems e.g. the number of followers. These outcomes are what push individuals to film and record events such as fights and accidents to become more popular. In the end, we lose our values and morals to satisfy our own selfish desires. Furthermore, those in power use information from these gadgets to shape people’s mindset be it through advertisements that erode people’s self-will (Lynch 2015).
Utilitarianism
Deontology
While implementing most of these technologies developers will emphasis on the need to bridge the gap between human interaction and technology where our wearable devices enhance our connections. Now, this ideal outcome is good, however, what duty or responsibility is held by the users? Deontology outlines the constraints and duties that push individuals to ethical or moral decisions and behaviours. However, consider the companies involved who after years of practice (that are characterised by lawsuits) now avoid the outcomes of their technologies using user agreements. Today, the first activity before using a technology is to sign an agreement that in most cases protect the developers from any legal claims (McNaughton & Rawling 2011).
So, the technologies provided have the capabilities of recording any activity and even starting life ending systems such as machines, and vehicles among many others but the users are solely left to make all the decisions and judgements. When this is done, one ethical dilemma stands, do the users use the said technologies ethically or not? Moreover, these questions become more complex when you consider the countless cases of cyber-security where hacking and accessing private documents is the norm.
Virtue
When critically analysed, wearable technologies present many ethical disasters if not catastrophes, for instance, using wearable bracelets users can track their heart rates, glucose levels and even monitor their financial activities all at the same time. Furthermore, using convenient online portals they can keep records of their activities for future reference. Now, take an example of a user who opens such portals in public settings be it cybercafé or workplace station and owing to extended privileges given to the administrator exposes his/her confidential details to them. In such a scenario, it takes the moral values of the administrator to maintain the privacy of the unsuspecting user (Saschina 2011).
In a nutshell, the virtues held by the users govern the use of wearable technologies which is also worrying based on the current behaviours exhibited by the society. In fact, the truth of matter is that when using wearable devices a person exposes their confidential information to the masses (Newman 2015). In essence, such outcomes are what lead to malicious activities such as identity theft because too much information is presented to the public.
Contract
In any given society or community, their cultural practices and norms determine their behaviours particularly, those that they see as acceptable. In the discussion above, we have highlighted the use of wearable devices where they used to record events that are highly sensitive and intrusive to other users. However, this outcome is as a result of the society’s values and practices that have made such behaviours to become acceptable. Therefore, instead of helping those in needs, people will first record events to satisfy their egos before helping others.
Deontology
Furthermore, wearable technologies have failed to meet one of their main objectives of supporting collaboration between communities as seen today where online social platforms are filled with users who value individuality and unfiltered expressions (Newman 2015). The society holds a contractual obligation to develop suitable norms and values on top of the legal policies to regulate these technologies. We should strive for a society where wearable technologies are used for the good including enhancing community interaction and not as platforms to enhance our own personal agendas. Moreover, these technologies should advance our moral and ethical standards, unlike today where they have clearly eroded them.
Conclusion
Technological advancements have enhanced our lives in so many ways however, they also have affected the way we behave. Users at the comfort of their homes and with the secrecy of pseudo names can alter and perform malicious activities over the internet. Now, wearable technologies are supposed to enhance real-time activities such as the interaction with the internet. As seen in this analysis, this outcome present many serious ethical issues, for instance, consider employers who are now considering introducing trackable devices (wearable gadgets) to track their employees and what they do. These functionalities, if implemented, will violet so many human rights related to privacy, security and intellectual property.
Nevertheless, since technology is here to stay and will continue advance beyond the current innovations, the society should develop ways of improving the behaviours of the users. In fact, we must become proponents of cultural change where other than feeding on our own desires and wishes we should strive to use these technologies in moral ways. Moreover, the developers (companies) must also take some responsibility by implementing systems that uphold good cultural values. In the end, the combination of the two is the only answer to meeting the ethical issues seen today with technological systems such as wearable technologies.
References
Baron, 2014, Notre Dame’s Reilly Center releases 2015 List of Emerging Ethical Dilemmas and Policy Issues in Science and Technology. Notre Dame News. Available at: https://news.nd.edu/news/notre-dames-reilly-center-releases-2015-list-of-emerging-ethical-dilemmas-and-policy-issues-in-science-and-technology/ [Accessed 05 May, 2017]
Burke. C, 2015, Pentagon Creating ‘Vampire-Like’ Drones That Disappears in Sunlight. Newsmax. Available at: https://www.newsmax.com/US/pentagon-creating-vampire-drones/2015/10/12/id/695797/ [Accessed 02 May, 2017]
Lacewing. M, 2014, Kant’s deontological ethics. Routledge Taylor & Francis group. Available at: https://documents.routledge-interactive.s3.amazonaws.com/9781138793934/A22014/ethical_theories/Kant%27s%20deontological%20ethics.pdf [Accessed 02 May, 2017]
Lacewing. M, 2014, Utilitarianism. Routledge Taylor & Francis group. Available at: https://documents.routledge-interactive.s3.amazonaws.com/9781138793934/A22014/ethical_theories/Utilitarianism.pdf [Accessed 02 May, 2017]
Lynch. M, 2015, Ethical Issues in Electronic Information Systems. Available at: https://www.colorado.edu/geography/gcraft/notes/ethics/ethics_f.html [Accessed 02 May, 2017]
McNaughton. D & Rawling. P, 2011, Deontological ethics. Available at: https://documents.routledge-interactive.s3.amazonaws.com/9781138936485/instr_philosophical/deontological_ethics.pdf [Accessed 02 May, 2017]
Newman. L, 2015, DARPA Wants to Create Delivery Vehicles That Vanish After Dropping Off Their Payload. Available at: https://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2015/10/13/darpa_s_new_icarus_vanishing_delivery_vehicles_program.html [Accessed 02 May, 2017]
Saschina, 2011, Ethical theories. A comparison of the three main branches of normative ethics. Available at: https://sites.saschina.org/thiessen/files/2011/08/Ethical-Theories-compared.pdf [Accessed 02 May, 2017]
Tnooz, 2014, Wearable technology is an ethical nightmare. Available at: https://www.tnooz.com/article/wearable-technology-ethics/ [Accessed 02 May, 2017]
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
