Philosophy 2078

Week 1:
What is Philosophy:

- What is Philosophy?
o A method of gathering knowledge that involves publicly making arguments to ensure our beliefs are
justified.
o Presenting a set of reasons to justify your beliefs—making arguments
- What marks philosophy as a discipline is not the subject matter, but the method by which wisdom is gathered
o Ph in PhD stands for philosophy—i.e. a doctor of the philosophy of biology
o Means you can reason critically about methods used/conclusions drawn from the application of
scientific/deductive methods pertaining to a given area of knowledge
o PhD’s direct their reasoning to a particular subject
- What is knowledge, Plato:
o “To say that person X has a knowledge of Y” is to say that person X has a (i) justified, (ii) true, (iii) belief
about Y
o (iii) implies knowledge refers to a person’s beliefs—on any matter
o (ii) restricts knowledge to justified beliefs—only beliefs that can be justified qualify as knowledge
 Must develop and articulate a set of reasons that establish a belief is compelling/plausible
o (i) restricts knowledge to true, justified beliefs—(iii) and (ii) are insufficient to qualify, a justified belief must
also be ‘true’
 A justified belief must also be objectively true, independent of the belief in question
¯ i.e., The earth is spherical:
 Belief: the earth is spherical
 Justification: citing a plethora of textbooks, scientists, e-resources, Google-Earth. References can
be presented as good reasons/evidence for believing the earth is spherical.
 Truth: Irrespective of any justification, the earth is empirically spherical.
- What is Truth?
o The truth of a statement does not depend on any human belief or justification of that statement, but rather
on the objectiveness of the statement
o Knowledge as ‘justified, true, belief’ qualifies that one can confidently say: ‘I know Y’
- The ideal Universe:
o Humans would always be rational and never make mistakes in reasoning: would resolve to never adopt any
belief unless it were justified AND true
 They could then be assured their beliefs were both justifiable and true, and reject any that don’t
meet these criteria
o We don’t live in the ideal universe due to:
 Fallibility: We have the capacity to engage in complex tasks and conceptualization using reason,
but are error prone while making reasonings or judgements (it is inevitable)
 Finite: We are severely limited by our abilities/characteristics—we can’t observe every
phenomenon and only live a short while—no single individual can acquire a truly substantial
amount of knowledge.
- Implications of not living in an ideal universe:
 o It is still the case that there are few beliefs that we can be absolutely certain are true—due to fallibility,
humans have limitations
o There is a high degree of probability that most human beliefs are false/incomplete/flawed/unjustifiable
o Philosophers share a desire to strive toward unattainable goals in the face of these insurmountable
obstacles—with greater awareness
o Instead of establishing true beliefs, philosophers aim to establish justified beliefs (~18 th century)
 The greater the justification in support of a belief, the more likely it will turn out as true
 The goal is to engage in the incomprehensible, to make the complexity of human existence less
incomprehensible, by gathering as much knowledge as one can
 The specific means: ensuring any belief is justified
- Arguments as a method of justifying beliefs:
o Arguments are the method philosophers use to justify beliefs
o Having an argument is between two people
o Making/Presenting/Developing an argument is to justify (individually) a belief
 Making an argument is usually done by a single individual
- Making an argument:
o Requires a compelling set of reasons that support a conclusion/thesis
o The capacity to make an argument, characterizes humans as ‘rational’ beings
o Referencing ‘rational’ or ‘intellectual’ capacities of humans, refers to the capacity to provide reasons in
support of beliefs
 Human ‘rational’ capacities are distinguishable from emotions—arguments should be rational, not
emotional
 Having a ‘feeling’, eg, does not qualify a good reason to accept a belief.
¯ Ex: probability that it’s still raining
 Premise 1: It was raining outside when I came inside (Justification 1)
 Premise 2: The weather report said more rain is expected (Justification 2)
 Conclusion: It is probably still raining outside (The conclusion is the Belief)
 Justifications are reasons/evidence to establish that a belief is justified: it’s a
supported belief, supported by a set of reasons most rational individuals would be
willing to accept as good.
- Method for identifying a belief/reasons:
o Identify the conclusion.thesis/point/claim/belief—Some have multiple conclusions, but each point to an
over-arching conclusion
o Identify the reasons separately
 EVERYTHING YOU WRITE SHOULD INCLUDE A POINT AND AT LEAST ONE REASON OFFERED IN
SUPPORT OF YOUR POINT
- Collective significance of making an argument publicly
o Note, we must Make and argument to somebody—This is how philosophy tries to overcome problems of
individual limitations
o If everyone makes justifications public, others can consider and assess the strength of those justifications
 Every academic is publicizing their views and inviting others to scrutinize their work and identify
flaws in their reasoning
o If there are flaws, the argument can be rejected (I.e. they are not good reasons to accept an argument
o If there are none, the argument can be accepted as PLAUSIBLE—a genuine contribution to the ongoing,
accumulation of knowledge by humans
o Humanity collectively attempts to thwart the limits that restrict the knowledge capacities of each individual
human

Summary:
 - Philosophy is a method for acquiring knowledge that involves producing and publicizing arguments in an effort to
ensure our beliefs are justified and true
- Knowledge, is a justified, true, belief as per plato
- The greater the justification, the more likely an argument is true
- An argument is a statement made by the individual, including premises and an over-arching conclusion
- If premises are not sufficient, we can reject a conclusion. If they are, the conclusion is plausible and contributes to a
collective effort in establishing truth
What is Ethics?
- What is ethics?
o A set of rules/principles/norms intended to guide and evaluate freely chosen human behavior
o Are normative: Imply the assertion of some value
- Normative Statements:
o Distinguished from descriptive/factual statements
o Fact-Value distinction: There is a difference between what we are doing (fact) and what we should be doing
(the value)
o A set of facts are not independently sufficient to justify a value claim
 The fact that we act a certain way is not enough to encourage us that we should act that way. A
value must be asserted to justify that claim
- What do ethical theories try to prove:
o Ethical theories attempt to describe, explain and justify our current systems of rules
o Explanations, are a task intended to provide basis for evaluating and/or amending those rules
 Object of analysis are the ethical rules
o Attempt to describe common features to all ethical rules, by explaining why those features are common, in
a manner that justifies their acceptance
 ‘Successful” ethical theory allows us to examine rules, discard those that don’t satisfy defining
features of ethics, and then adding new ones that do.
- Utilitarianism:
o Is consequentialist: When evaluating morality of human action, the only relevant feature is the
consequence it generates
o Is monistic: there is only one fundamental principle to which all moral obligations can be reduced, i.e. utility
- Principle of Utility:
o Asserts, the morally correct action is the one which generates the greatest amount of good consequences
for the greatest amount of people
o Act utilitarianism: An agent should appeal to this principle any time they act
o Rule utilitarianism: an agent should choose a set of rules which maximize overall utility
- Two parts of the principle of utility
o The instruction to maximize good consequences
o A theory of value: an account of what counts as a morally good/bad consequence
 Hedonism: There is only one object of moral value; pleasure and the absence of pain
 Bentham asserts each pleasure is equivalent and quantitative, Mill asserts each pleasure
is distinct and qualitative
 Value Pluralism: There is a plurality of equally fundamental values (e.g. knowledge, experiences of
aesthetic beauty, and the absence of pain)
 Moore argues there isn’t a single fundamental value owing to the diversity of individual
human experience
o Impartiality: No agents experience of consequences takes priority over anotherWeek 2:
- Kant’s Deontology:
o Comes from the words deon (duty) and logos (the study of)
- Difference and similarity to utilitarianism
o Non-Consequentialist: Moral value has nothing to do with consequences, rather moral value is located
exclusively in the motive that lead to the action
 Kant argued that people are capable of choosing to act in specific ways
 Humans are able to control what’s going on in their heads such that they do act, over any
consequence that might arise
 Motives should be the focus of moral responsibility because motives are what we can control
 We are individually and independently responsible for our motives for action
 o Monistic: There is only one moral principle to which all moral obligations can be reduced, the categorical
imperative
- Rational agency and deontology
o Rational agency is the basis for individual human freedom
o Human action is not entirely determined by causal forces, we have the capacity to overcome our
inclinations using reason
o The capacity to act on the basis of rationality is common to all humans, what qualifies as good reason is
minimally the same for all humans
- The law of non-contradiction: A good reason cannot rely on a contradiction
o Were each individually responsible for our motives, what qualifies as a rational motive will be the same for
all
 Rational abilities explain the sense in which we are (a) free from nature (b) capable of being held
responsible for our actions
 We should act in a manner that reflects that rational capacity
 We should act according to one law that applies only to those with a capacity for rational action
- First formulation of the categorical imperative
o Act only according to that motive whereby you can at the same time will it become a universal law
 You cannot act rationally if the motive is not a motive that anyone in similar circumstances could
adopt without contradiction
 The law of non-contradiction: it is our moral obligation to ensure our reasons for action are
rational, the test is whether it can be adopted by any rational being
 You are not permitted to make an exception of yourself by acting for reasons other rational agents
could not rely upon
- Second formulation of the categorical imperative:
o Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other,
never merely as a means to an end but always at the same time as an end”
 Humans are capable of choosing their own goals as rational beings, by acting on reason over
inclination
 We are morally obligated to show respect for that capacity in ourselves and others
 We show respect by ensuring whatever actions we undertake never treat others as a mere means
to fulfil a specific goal
 DOES NOT MEAN you cannot treat others as a means, you can, only if you respect their rational
agency
- Virtue Ethics:
o Focuses on identifying the morally relevant qualities of specific actions
o Primary concern: determining the type of person that one should strive to be (developing the right sort of
character)
o We should develop the personal characteristics that a morally virtuous person would be expected to posess
- Eudaimonia
o A condition under which the individual flourishes, the goal of human life
- What are practical virtues:
o Developing virtues by habituating yourself to act in a way that aims at the mean between extremes
 E.g. a courageous individual seeks the mean between cowardice and brashness
o A person that is able to develop a character that is habituated toward moderation in their actions is the
person who is ‘virtuous’ and is therefore the ‘ethically right’ sort of person
 Will more likely achieve eudaimonia
- Feminist Ethics:
o Asserts that women have been explicitly/implicitly excluded from and/or demeaned by the traditional
philosophical discourse about ethics
o Goal: To identify and remove arbitrary appeals to patriarchy, which perpetuate the oppression of women
o Maintains that women enjoy a unique experience of moral life that is not reflected in any of the three
dominant ethical theories
o First characterized by Carol Giligan in 1982, opposing Lawrence Kohlberg
- Six hierarchal stages of moral development
o Kohlberg established six stages of moral development and stated on the basis of research, that women
rarely move past the 3rd stage
o Giligan conducted her own research (which supported the same results) and didn’t reach the ‘post-
conventional’ stage
 o Giligan stated that this data doesn’t show that women suffer from moral deficiency
o The moral lives of women are qualitatively distinct from men, who experience ethics as justice. Women
experience an ethic of care
- An ethic of care
o Giligan conducted her own research (which supported the same results) and didn’t reach the ‘post-
conventional’ stage
o Giligan stated that this data doesn’t show that women suffer from moral deficiency
o The moral lives of women are qualitatively distinct from men, who experience ethics as justice. Women
experience an ethic of care
o An ethic of care: Moral behaviour should be directed toward prioritizing, protecting, and promoting close
caring interpersonal relationships
- Controversies of an ethic of care:
o Is it accurate/wise to maintain women’s ethical experiences are qualitatively different from those of men?
o Is an ethic of care intended to supplement or supplant the dominant ethical theories
o Is an ethic of care only possible for/among women

Summary:
- According to Utilitarianism: moral rules are/should be focused on the consequences of actions. The right action (or
moral rule) is the action (or moral rule) that maximizes the good consequences for all those affected by the action.
- According to Deontology: moral rules are/should be focused on the motives that lead to individual action. The right
motive (and subsequent action) is one that either i. All could adopt without contradiction and/or ii. Respects the
rational agency of other persons.
- According to Virtue Ethics, the primary ethical concern is not action, but character (developed over a lifetime of
action). The morally desirable character is one that has developed virtuous habits, specifically the habit of seeking the
mean behaviour between extremes.
- According to an Ethic of Care, the morally right action is the action that prioritizes, protects, and promotes close and
caring interpersonal relationships.

Week 2: Matthews/Marturano/Bao and Xiang/Douglas

Matt hews—New forms of old ethical problems
- Primary Goal:
o Identify and describe the sorts of ethical issues to which the internet has given rise
- Thesis:
o The internet provides a new means/mechanism/instrument of human interpretation; the specific ethical
issues created by the internet are not new, but manifest in a novel manner
- Structure of the internet:
o Main goal: to define/identify/describe such elements of the internet—they are most important in the task
of identifying/describing ethical issues it generates
o Three features to be understood:
 There is a procedure to ensure information is tracked from source to destination
 The internet is not owned by any single entity—openness has been designed to benefit each of its
users
 Internet links computers into networks, as well as networks to networks
o The web is not the internet: the web is one means by which content is posted to/retrieved from the
internet
o Three features create Great opportunity and concern. We can freely access large quanitities of data and
connect with large groups of individuals, although on an unfamiliar and unregulated system
- New Means, Classical Practical Goals
o Ethical issues that arise from the internet are novel, since they could not manifest without the internet.
 E.g. Phishing is one particular form of deception, Trolling is a form of harassment. Both
behaviors are consistently, ethically impermissible
o The practices of deception aren’t new, therefore ethical concerns are not new. The means by which they
practice in manifest are new
- Privacy:
 o Main goal: to explicate a common ethical concern and how it appears on the internet
o Dominating concerns with respect to privacy are: physical privacy and privacy of information
 Information privacy is prevalent on the internet
o Information Privacy: collection and aggregation of data/distribution of data
o Collecting data, can serve a variety of valuable social functions—improved health care or security
o What needs to be determined: how to strike the right balance between privacy and public goods
o Related problems:
 Our ability to share information about ourselves online that will never be erased and can easily be
manipulated negatively
 Anonymity, the desire to engage in a behaviour without accountability can serve as a freedom
(political participation) and a negative (criminal activity)
- Moral identity:
o Identiy Is: a careful construction that excludes non-voluntary elements of our personalities
o Limited exposure of true selves: leads us to be concerned that genuine relationships in the form of
friendship/love are not possible online
o Also problematic: The tendency of the internet to narrow our points of view allows us to seek those with
whom we share similar perspectives—Increases confirmation bias
- Political activity:
o Political benefit: Citizens of democracies, have a substantial amount of information immediately available
to inform political participation
 Freedom and anonymity also allows those in non-democratic societies to exercise political power
in a way that was previously impossible
o Political Problem: Tendencies of ‘self-guided information’ foster narrowing of viewpoints
 Democracy is supposed to confront competing ideas, not exclusively those that we are
sympathetic to
o Related Problem: Fostering more extreme-versions of political opinions. Positions become polarized when
proponents don’t have opposition
- Trust:
o Is integral to the possibility of a functioning society
 Cannot engage in commerce without trust
o Too trusting: i.e. freely uploading personal information makes them vulnerable to the harms of online
criminals
o Not sufficiently trusting: I.e. refusing to engage in economic activity, since the costs associated with trying
to build that trust are significant
- Copyright:
o A novel problem for the sorts of claims of ownership and control that can be extended to digital materials
 Do content creators ‘own’ materials in the same way someone can own a coffee cup, since these
materials could be easily reproduced
o The ease with which digital copying can be done suggests ‘illegal downloading’ cannot be construed as
stealing
o Those who pursue this argument: maintain that ownership rights need to be restricted by the addition that
the content makes to the shared culture
- The Future:
o Any new form of technology may be new, but concerns about privacy, identity, trust, democracy, and
ownership will all persist in a manner similar to those concerns in the past

Marturano—The unique Character of Computer Ethics

- Section Breakdown:
o First section: Presents his thesis that Johnson’s view about computer ethics is flawed
o Second section: he describes Johnson’s view non-critically
o Remaining sections: Presents reasons for thinking his thesis is compelling
- Thesis:
o “I will argue against Deborah Johnson’s position that computer ethics will ‘disappear’ and become a part of
‘ordinary ethics’.
- The introduction:
 o Begins with a definition of computer ethics: “It studies the ethical implications of information and
communication technologies”
o Provides a brief outline of the steps of his essay: Focus on the “theoretical background” and “metaethical
concepts”
 Discussing the ‘theoretical background’ upon which Johnson depends, as well as ‘metaethical
concepts’ that her view invokes
- The description of Johnson’s view
o Johnson’s View: Digital tools become the presumed background condition… What was for a time an issue of
computer ethics becomes simply an ethical issue.
 Computer ethics is likely to disappear as a subject, because computer will have simply become a
part of our everyday lives
 Johnson’s view is similar to Mathew’s
o Marturano explains that he’s not entirely sure what Johnson means by claiming computer ethics will
disappear: which is the primary problem
- First Objection on Johnson’s view: Since computers are likely to always be with us, why won’t computer ethics?
o Based on the assumption that computers expand into multiple aspects of our lives
o If that’s true, why won’t computer ethics continue?
o His example: Science will rely on technology, so it’s uses will be unique and specialized to suit each purpose.
There may not be a distinct ‘computer ethics’ but there will be ethical concerns that arise in respect of
scientific technology developed for particular (scientific) purposes.
- Second Objection on Johnson’s view: Her failure to define what is meant by saying computer ethics will become
‘ordinary ethics’
o Metaethics: Determining what ethical statements mean, and whether they capture some feature of the
universe
o Normative ethics: Attempts to elaborate the substance of moral rules by identifying what is good/just/right
and/or when and how people should be responsible for their actions
o Applied Ethics: Attempts to use ethical theories to identify and resolve ethical issues that emerge in the
context of particular practices/areas of knowledge
o Computer ethics is a branch of Applied Ethics, how does ‘ordinary ethics’ fit into this scheme
 Cultural moral rules: her claim doesn’t suggest the unique concerns presented by digital
technologies will simply dissapear
 Ethical theories: her meaning is very unclear since those theories deal with abstract moral
principles, whereas ethical concerns created by digital tech are particular and concrete
o If ‘ordinary ethics’ suggests computer ethics will become a part of applied ethics, an ‘ethics of technology’
then that seems plausible—Johnsons explanations suggest she means ‘ethical theory’ which is not
compelling
- Computer Ethics as Applied Ethics
o Johnson’s position might be rescued by framing ordinary ethics as a reference to applied ethics, by
appealing to Norbert Weiner and Bertrand Russel
o Wiener on Technology: Technology is shaped by the interests of business, but gives rise to questions of
human rights and the rights of future generations
 There is a shared and mistaken belief that all tech advances are meant to make life better for
existing and future generations. It is mistaken, in the interests of business; Exploitation will not
create an ideal world
 The implication is that Computer ethics is a form of applied ethics not ethical theory
o Russel on Technology: Technology has allowed humans to free themselves from the laws of nature; but
newfound freedom gives a mistaken sense of unlimited power over nature.
 Needs to be tempered by focused ethical inquiry—to determine the degree to which each change
produces the greatest good for humanity
 The application of a general ethical principle (utilitarianism) to a specific human practice is,
objectively, applied ethics
- Conclusion
o If Johnson’s claim is interpreted to mean that digital ethical questions give rise to invole applying classical
ethical theories to concrete problems it is unproblematic
o Johnson’s claim is not clearly explains, and suggests that computer ethics will become a part of ethical
theory
o Weiner and Russel’s perspectives show:
 Tech advances are pervasive and serve as a means of control over nature and fellow humans
  Ethical questions that must be answered in respect to tech are all drawn from common ethical
theories (Questions about their impact on ‘rights’ or the ‘good of humanity’)
o This means, computer ethics is a part of applied ethics, which will remain pressing so long as tech continues
to influence our interactions with one another
Bao and Xiang—How the internet allows for, and inspires a global ethics
- Thesis: The internet has introduced the unprecedented opportunity for all nations to adopt a common set of moral
rules, rules which will be informed by the character of the internet itself
o Proposes that the interned introduces/requires a new set of ethical considerations
- Global ethics, pluralism and the era of the internet
o Explaining the notion of a system of global ethics, highlighting the major obstacle, and providing three
reasons for thinking the internet wll facilitate that system
- Global Ethics:
o Attempt to develop a set of behavioural norms/standards/principles to structure the interactions of all
members of the global community, one that depends on achieving a consensus
o Problem: Plurality of incompatible moral standards upon which cultural groups depend
o Three reasons to believe the internet can facilitate global ethics:
 Internet allows for real time interactions between diverse cultural groups, that might yield
consensus
 Internet facilitates participation of all nations and cultural groups to engage in building such a
system
 Internet transforms the notion of a system of global ethics from an unworkable ideal to a practical
reality
- Changing Thinking: Emphasizing Cultural Similarities over Differences
o Bao and Xiang explain why we must change our thinking about pluralism and diversity for global ethics to be
possible
o Problem: The internet’s value is not perceived in the same way by all nations/cultural groups
 Many nations try to resist perceived American dominance by trying to preserve theur unique
cultural character (e.g. by protecting language)
 This perspective (is pre-internet, therefore old) focuses on differences across cultures
o We must shift away from pluralism and the emphasis on differences; the goal should be to establish
consensus across diverse groups by emphasizing similarities
o Will yield a new set of ethical principles that reflect the character of interactions on the internet
 i.e. Will reflect and/or protect the unique character of distinct cultural groups since each will have
participated in the formulation
- Four Fundamental Principles Necessary for a Global Ethics
o Four principles that need to be adopted to have a robust system of global ethics
 To say fundamental principles, is to say that a cross-cultural discussion of global ethics would not
be possible without their being widely adopted
 Four principles are not a system of global ethics on their own, but they need to be followed to get
the conversation started
o The internet allows for the possibility of universal communication, but the substance of these
communications needs to be restricted by four basic principles:
- Sincerity:
o Basic norm in the context of the internet is sincerity—being your genuine self when interacting with others
online
o Lack of sincerity generates a lack of trust, which hinders fruitful interactions
- Respect:
o Manifests in three forms, between individuals/nations/cultures
o Respect is captured by the golden rule—When individuals/nations/cultures interact they must do so in a
manner that recognizes the status of the moral agents with whom they are interacting as moral agents
 This recognition will facilitate tolerance of diverse opinions and/or national and cultural practices
- Justice:
o Thinking that everyone is equal on the internet obscures the reality of the inequalities that exist between
individuals/nations/cultures in the real-world
o How can interactions online be structured so that they are just?
 Those with power should be required to ensure they don’t strive to secure dominance
  Those lacking power should be encouraged to engage on the internet, and not withdraw or
depend on the strategies that have benefitted the strong
o These two approaches should yield greater fairness
- Security:
o Adopted on the basis of the unique forms of harm the internet allows—the collection of information that
individuals/nations/cultures wish to keep private
o Individuals online should respect the privacy of others
o When we are free from unwanted interference, we will be in a position to engage in discourse proposed by
global ethics
- Summary:
o The internet introduces a possibility of a system of global ethics that enjoys widespread consensus
o We must change our thinking about pluralism—we need to determine how to think about our interactions
in a manner that emphasizes the similarities we share
o We will need to abide by four basic moral ideas when interacting online—Sincerity, respect, justice, security
Douglas—Using Rawls’s social contract theory to assess access to internet
regulations
- Douglas is concerned with the ethical status of the regulations used to determine who gets access to digital resources
o Similarly to Matthews and Marturano—he doesn’t seem to think access to the internet creates new ethical
principles but requires application of old ones to new circumstances
- Thesis:
o Relying on John Rawls’ social contract theory as a basis for understanding what constitutes just access to
the internet is desirable because it helps to avoid policies that are biased in favour of existing digital
technologies, and biases caused by the self-interest of policy makers.
- Ethical Concerns Raised by the Internet and Unsatisfying Solutions
o Douglas begins by describing problems/solutions that issues of access to the internet have raised, focusing
on the inadequacies of those solutions
o The Problem: is the fight for control over the internet, giving rise to the question; who should have access
to internet resources and the nature of that access
o Problem of resolution: We depend too heavily on our existing technologies rather than focusing on what
those technologies could or should do
 Access to the internet should be understood as a human right
 Its problematic since it raises questions regarding there is a human right to access online gaming
o Solution: Analysis of access to digital resources depends heavily on descriptions of those resources which
avoid bias
- Rawls Theory of Justice:
o Section 2 aims to describe rawls’ argument
o Rawls’ goal: to present and defend a set of ideal principles for a just society—i.e. identifying principles for
which a democratic society characterized as ‘ideally just’ must be regulated
o The social contract: Political authority can only be legitimate when it enjoys ‘the consent of the governed’
 The starting point, whatever principles might be used to construct fair social institutions, need to
be accepted/endorsed by all rational beings
o A method for justifying principles for an ideally just democratic society
- Rawls’ thought experiment:
o Imagining what Rawls’ calls the original position, where individuals decide on principles that should be
chosen to organize society are behind the ‘veil of ignorance’
o The veil allows negotiators limited knowledge of the character of the world, none have any sense of their
own position in the world or even their desires
o Behind the veil, everyone is a free and equal rational being, unaffected by bias or circumstance
 The limited knowledge each negotiator possesses consists only in knowledge of the primary goods
every rational human would need to fulfill their life plan
 Rights, liberties, powers; opportunities; wealth and income; self-respect
o Rawls claims, rational agents behind the veil would choose two basic principles to structure social
interactions which would secure for each, the greatest possible share of primary goods
 Like liberty for all
 Inequalities are to be structured to the advantage of the least well-off
- Douglas’ Question:
o Where would access to information generally, and access to digital information technologies in particular, fit
in rawls’ discussion
o Douglas Maintains: Access to information should be added to the list of primary goods
 Implies: All should have an equal liberty to access information, justifies inequalities in that access
so long as those inequalities work to the benefit of the least well off
- From Principles to Functioning Social Institutions:
o An attempt to explain how fundamental but abstract principles of justice can generate meaningful social
policy for an ideal democratic society
o Idea: to proceed from abstract to more particular by providing negotiators behind the veil of ignorance with
greater amounts of information about their social circumstances
o First stage is the original position (only knowing and seeking primary goods);
o Second stage involves sharing facts about the society with the negotiators, but not sharing specific
information about the negotiators themselves
  Addition of sharing, allows negotiators to formulate a constitution consistent with the principles
chosen in the original position, is suitable in the society characterized by these general facts,
avoids self-interested bias
 Constitution: General law that defines who gets to make laws about what topics, and what limits
are imposed on lawmaking powers
 Constitution is the fundamental law of any society, if some law violates the constitution it is not a
law at all
o Third stage: Information of particulars of society will be provided, without personal information
 Now negotiators can formulate specific laws that reflect the constitution
- Avoiding Bias Toward Existing Digital Technology in a constitution:
o Objective: to explain how the method Rawls presents can be used to avoid entrenching an existing digital
technology
o Only a limited account of digital information technology should be given to the negotiators once they
proceed to the second stage
 How to avoid bias in favour of existing technologies
- Information provided about digital technologies to avoid that bias should be limited to explaining that:
o They are toolds that allow users to store, transmit and present information
o They are a unique form of information tech, because their treatment of info depends on their programming
 Introduces a possibility that some information could be manipulated and/or transmitted without
user knowledge
o An essential element of digital tech, is their capacity to facilitate communication that depends on the
existence of an information network
o Digital tech, and communication networks depend on social cooperation for their existence and
maintenance—will raise distribution questions about who can exert control over them and to what degree
- Avoiding Self Interest in Digital Information Technology Regulations:
o Any policy will need to be developed in a manner that facilitates the primary good of access to information,
as restricted by like liberty for all, and justifiability when they benefit the least well off
o A just information network: will be defined by a policy that facilitates access to and the exchange of
information, in a way that respects the two principles
o A just policy: In respect of computing devices permits their ownership and allows the control of information
in a manner that the user can choose
o Using Rawls’ method: Whatever the policy, it will not be influenced by self-interest. Absence of self-interest
means each regulator will try to ensure access is as widely distributed as possible
- Summary:
o i. We avoid policies that are biased in favour of existing technologies, and
o ii. Any policies about access that are developed will not reflect the self-interested biases of the policy
makers.

Week 3: Schechtman/Wolfendale/Craft
Schechtman—Personal Identity in the virtual world
- The reading is focused narrowly on trying to understand ONLY the effect of online multiplayer avatars on personal
identity
o He is NOT offering any insight into the moral status of online selves
- Thesis: A narrative approach to personal identity can explain the sense in which a person and the avatar whose
actions they control and experience are identical; the user and the avatar can be considered sub-plots of a broader
single-person narrative.
- The questions virtual reality raises about personal identity
o Her goal is purely descriptive
o Some people who participate in VR games regard the life lived by the avatar as literally indistinguishable
from their real lives offline
o Problem: Some users do not distinguish between second life and real life—all experiences are real to them
o Significance of ‘Playing’: In many games youre just playing, pretending to take on a certain character
o Significance of ‘expressing”: in some games you imbue an avatar with personal characteristics you may
suppress in real life
 o The idea that participating in an online environment is ‘expressive’ fails to capture the strength of the
statement made by some… its not just that avatars express hidden personality traits, but some people
literally believe they are their avatars
- The narrative view of Personal Identity
o Her goal is purely descriptive
o The narrative approach: each person is a unique and unified narrative individuating one person from
another and preserves their identity
 This narrative self-constitution view—maintains that a person is a single consciousness persisting
over time (not a body)
 Problems: Do people with mental inhibitions ‘cease’ to be themselves if they can no longer
remember. Its only in the community of our psyche that makes us a single person
o Schectman: the continuity of the person is best captured by the unity of a personal narrative (life-story)
 There’s a single unified life story to describe us, that depends on our capacity to live according to
norms
 The point is rather that the narrative shapes experiences—i.e. the same event will generate a
different experience in each narrative irrespective of individual awareness
o There are two constraints on every narrative
 Reality: Every narrative conforms to every day facts about the character of the world
 Articulation: Demands an individual be capable of articulating elements of their story as necessary
as a means of individuating themselves from the narratives of others
 Ensure the individual has applied the concept of personhood to their own lives, which
ensures they recognize the normative elements of existence and allows them to live
according to these norms
- The User, The avatar and Their Interactions
o A narrative unity can be established between avatar and user
o Narrative unity does not follow from the fact that the actions of the avatar are controlled entirely by the
user, that’s just the narrative of the user meaning the avatar is relegated to the status of a ‘fiction’
 We cannot construe the avatar as a person
 Avatars cannot be identical to the person in real life
 The nature of VR is markedly distinct from the real world, meaning the narrative of the avatar is
distinct from the user
o Second life can affect real life in direct/specific ways, and in general/indirect ways
 The frequency with which RL interferes with SL; strange behaviour from an avatar is often
explained by the user having to temporarily deal with RL
 The interactions between SL and RL cannot be described as a form of ‘play acting’ the effects of
assuming the role of characters in a play are not the same effects in kind or degree as the effects
of SL on RL
- Implications; Two sub-plots of a ‘single broad person narrative’
o Schechtman is concluding that RL user and SL avatar are ‘sub-plots’ in a single person narrative
o RL person and SL avatar can be understood to be identical with one another
o SL and RL can be considered parts of a unified broad person narrative, one in which distinguishable sub-
plots impact each other in fundamental ways.
o What this account of SL narratives reveal is the complexity of an Narrative self constitution view,
understanding of personal identity
 It needs to accommodate the various sub-narratives and compartmentalization that occurs in real
life, by invoking the idea that these are all parts of a unified broad person narrative

Wolfendale—Avatar att achment and the basis of moral harm

- Online avatars can plausibly be construed as an extension of individual identity, understanding an avatar as an
extension of identity gives rise to the possibility of a real moral wrong
- Thesis: The attachments people normally enjoy to their possessions and communities are considered morally
significant in real life; when similar attachments develop toward an avatar in the virtual world, consistency demands
that those attachments be regarded as similarly morally significant
- The seriousness of virtual harm
o Both anecdotal evidence and formal studies suggest, that harms on one’s online character have significant
impacts on their person in real life
 o Emotional: Players emotionally invest in their characters so that they can derive pleasure from the
experience
o Emotional Vulnerability: Leaves players significant emotional harm/pain when online characters are
violated by others
o This emotional harm is not sufficient to say those harms are morally significant
- Moral Expectations in Text-Based and 3D Games
o Wolfendale on Power’s: Acts of the characters are the speech acts of the users, creating controller-
character identification. The interactions of the members of the community give rise to legitimate moral
expectations.
 The combination of the identification of character and controller with the set of moral
expectations that give rise to legitimate harms when characters are violated, qualify as genuine
moral wrongs
 In 3D role playing games, Powers states moral wrongs Cannot occur. Communities in 3D games
distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable forms of violence.
 3D games develop and rely upon moral expectations that are similar in their character to the sorts
of expextations appearing in text based games.
 If there are moral obligations in 3D worlds we need to show that the connection between user
and avatar is similar
- The user and the Avatar
o Contrary to Power’s view of 3D avatars, there is no reason to maintain character controller identification in
text-based games is stronger than in the context of 3D games
o Added strength of the connection is a function of the addition of a physical representation of the character
o Communication using avatars is more robust
 Avatars express personality
 Harm to the avatar is experienced by the user as harm unto themselves
- Morally Significant and Insignificant Attachments
o Moral significance implies that a failure to develop/respect forms of attachment is considered to be a moral
failure
 E.g., people are genuinely entitled to be upset when their possessions are stolen because their
attachment to the possession has been violated.
o Attachments are morally significant because of the profound role they play in psychological well-being and
individual self-conception
 When one of these attachments is violated, it is a moral wrong in the sense that it violates the
well-being of the person by wiolating their understanding of themselves/place in the world
o Morally insignificant attachments—Is avatar attachment a morally significant attachment, or an unhealthy
attachment to the imaginary?
 An avatar is not an imaginary object, it is a medium for self-expression and a form of on-line
identity.
 An avatar only meaningfully exists in the context of community
 We cannot deny the moral significance of avatar attachment without also denying the moral
significance of our real world attachments
 We should discourage avatar attachments on consequentialist grounds (its not good
emotionally, financially, socially to devote attention to the game
- The Problem with an appeal to Negative Consequences
o Moral significance of avatar attachment should be ignored owing to the bad consequences those
attachments create for users
o Two reasons for thinking an appeal to negative consequences is unlikely to succeed:
 Empirical studies suggest players engaged in 3D multiplayer games DON’T suffer bad
consequences
 People participate in these sorts of games because of the pleasure their attachment brings;
encouraging detachment from avatars would undermine a primary purpose of playing the game
o Would avatar detachment lead to less harm when the avatar is violated, reducing/eliminating its moral
significance?
 This recommendation would be equally applicable to real life attachments
o It follows that consistency demands that attachments to online avatars in a community of shared values be
recognized as having the same kind of moral significance as real world attachments to objects, persons, and
communities
 It follows that when those attachments are violated a genuine moral wrong occurs
Craft—Moral Wrongs in Virtual Reality
- Like Schectman craft believes players are expressing personal identity by acting in a virtual environment, like
Wolfendale he believes online behaviour can amount to a serious moral wrong
- Craft focuses more on the degree to which players communicate in online environments, and the rules they accept as
players
- He analyzes a particular case where theft and betrayal could both be understood as genuine moral wrongs
- Thesis: Though there are differences between the way in which people interact online when compared to the real
world, similar sets of obligations apply online because people are still interacting in a context structured by rules of
appropriate conduct
- A Virtual Reality (EVE online)
o Describing the character of virtual worlds, the incident that is the focal point of his analysis and noting the
limited academic discussion
o VR refers to: Online activities which individuals interact in a variety of different ways, mitigated by a
computer and the internet
o Computer games create: A fictional universe in which characters can undertake tasks, develop skills,
acquire objects using time/effort
o Theft and Betrayal: A group of online assasins for hire (GHSC) infiltrated a corporation by gaining the trust
of its members
 They virtually murdered the leader of the corporation and stole the bulk of its assets
 Is it plausible to maintain these actions were morally wrong? If so, what made them immoral?
- The metaphysical Features of a Virtual World
o Identify and describe the unique ‘metaphysical’ elements of a virtual reality most relevant to assessing the
moral status of players actions
 GHSC denies any form of moral responsibility—They were merely acting according to characters
they created
 Their victims reported feeling extremely betrayed by these players with whom they thought they
had a genuine friendship
o Virtual games are similar but different from “theme park” or other games
o They are universes created by others for the purpose of the amusement of users, for which players pay a
fee
 EVE users invest their resources to explore new elements, improvising and forming relationships
 VR games are regulated by ‘user agreements’—The primary goal of an EULA is to specify the
relationship between creator/administrator and user (not between users)
o Need to understand two features in the virtual world
 Collaborative fiction through role playing—collaboration leads to the formation of a shared set of
standards of behaviour
 Interpersonal communication—Represent real people who decide their behaviour
o VR is a fictional representation of an alternate reality, real people invest real time interacting
 Voluntary acceptance of EULA terms will be the most significant identifier of morally appropriate
behaviour in VR
 EULA made no specific reference to theft/betrayal
 But VR games are a medium of communication… actual people are interacting
- The members of GHSC Behaved Imorally when they Stole and Betrayed
o The immorality of Virtual Theft in EVE
 According to Craft, Virtual theft meets all the criteria of real-world theft—GHSC intentionally and
fraudulently took personal property of its victims without consent for its on purposes
 Informal property rights can be understood to exist between users because: Users invest real
time/energy to acquire, objects have real value, objects have utility within the game
 GHSC was wrong to steal because of the effect of stealing on their victims
o There is no plausible basis for arguing that theft is permitted under EULA
 The mere fact that theft can occur does not imply that its designed into the game
 The administrators refusal to take responsibility for theft does not imply that they encourage the
practice.
o The immorality of virtual Betrayal
  Theft in EVE is a betrayal since there is no mechanism by which to take the virtual property of
another user by force; access can only be granted using the sharing function (when one user trusts
another)
 Users are both role-playing and talking to eachother as actual individuals
 Two reasons that all communicative activites are between real people:
 A promise to let antoher use virtual equipment is a promise to do something actual
 All users know of the persona/person distinction meaning ambiguity could be resolved
by users
 A refusal to clarify can only be explained by a desire to deceive, it. Follows that GHSC betrayed the
trust of those users with whom they created relationships which is just as immoral as if it occurred
in person
o While it would, were it subject to the informed consent of all users, be possible to suspend the normal rules
of morality in a virtual world, in the absence of that consent, the rules of common sense morality obtain

Week #4: Kaliarnta/Sharp

Sharp—The diffi culties of ideal friendship online
- Thesis:
o It is unlikely that online interactions could yield the ideal forms of friendship Aristotle describe; that’s
problematic because a failure to develop perfect friendship jeopardizes our ability to develop virtuous
personality traits
- A Cyberspace and Aristotelian Friendships
o Describes Aristotle’s notion of perfect friendship and the significance of that idea in a modern world
 Perfect friendship is based on the significance of friendship to the possibility of a living good
 Friendship
 Perfect friendships between two parties establish a common pursuit of virtue
o The internet is a mode of communication, that allows for the easy formation of new/the rekindling old
friendships
o Only focuses on friendships that begin/take place online
 Real life friendships that are supplemented by online interactions may, maintain ‘perfect
friendships’
o Critiques/Concerns:
 Online friendships are purely superficial, therefore not genuine
 Friends significantly impact our character, and the quality of our lives
 Perfect friendships between two parties establish a common pursuit of virtue
o Aristotle identifies three categories of friendship:
 Friendships based on utility: Each party uses the other to accomplish a common goal
 Friendships based on pleasure: each party draws pleasure from the company of the other
 Perfect friendship: wherein each party pursues virtue and wish only good things for one another
 Contains the characteristics of the other two forms, but only as elements of the primary
commitment to the well-being of the other
 Reciprocity is at the centre of this ideal
 Friends don’t let the other fall into error, but help each other to overcome/avoid
temptation in tough times
o Online exchanges may express parts of this ideal
 i.e. advice depends on the character of the advisor, it matters that the friends from whom the
advice come from are virtuous if we want to be virtuous ourselves
- How we Percieve Others (argument 1):
o Our inability to perceive those with whom we interact online, prevents a perfect friendship
o The medium (internet) prevents us from fully experiencing the person with whom we are interacting
 Intentional non-disclosure of information
 Becoming less concerned about internet privacy doesn’t guarantee intentional non-disclosure will
disappear
 We are not perfectly self aware, friends act as an outside observer which is not possible online
 Physical proximity increases the effectiveness of outside observers more than online interactions
o Problem: If we know the person offline as well, the above may be reduced but the friendship wont be
exclusively online
 - You through the eyes of your friend
o Sharp defends that online friendships prevent us from being able to develop our understanding of the way
we are seen by others
o The primary benefit of friendship is the degree to which it contributes to self awareness
o ‘apperception’: “the process by which we come to understand ourselves through the actions and
judgements of other people”
o Utility: Apperception prompts us to change to accommodate others in order to achieve goals
 Such a change would be temporary for the purpose of fulfilling the goal (yields little change in
values)
o Pleasure: Apperception can serve as a response to peer pressure: we change to fit what we think the other
person wants
 We are motivated to change in the pursuit of pleasure, rather than being motivated by our desire
to become a better person
o Perfect Friendship: Apperception yields only positive change, since each person is virtuous, and each is
seeking to preserve/promote the virtue of the other
 Requires a high degree of intimacy, both must see the other, and be seen by the other to be
engaged in self-improvement
 Can only occur when both are willing/able to devote time/effort to the relationship as a means of
developing familiarity
o Online users can be fooled easily into believing they are interacting with another person that is a
computer program
 AI relies on computer statements to formulate responses which means they may foster self-
reflection
 Self-reflection is not the same as apperception, we would only be confirming what we already
believe about ourselves
o Internet is not solely responsible for the apparent decline in empathy, it is however, exacerbated by
increased online interactions and the decline of real social interactions
o The information we receive from online friends Is insufficient for the development of perfect friendship.
 PROXIMITY IS ESSENTIAL TO PERFECT FRIENDSHIP
- Is a Perfect Friendship Impossible Online:
o They are Likely impossible in an exclusive online relationship
o The lack of proximity is an obstacle
o It is possible for two online users to overcome proximity issues
 It is not likely that this effort would satisfy Aristotle’s definition
o The internet provides a tool for supplementing and maintaining offline friendships, thanks to the immediacy
of the connection
o In the context of exclusively online friendships, there is little change the lack of proximity could allow the
development of a relationship that fullfills Aristotle’s ideals.

Kaliarnta—Online Interactions Could Foster Aristotle’s Perfect Friendship

- Thesis: The denials of the possibility of achieving aristotle’s ideal of perfect (which she calls ‘virtue’) friendship in an
exclusively online relationship are all flawed which implies that virtue friendship could be possible online
- Aristotle’s Virtue Friendship Can’t Happen Online
o Aristotle’s perfect friendship: Utility, pleasure and ‘virtue’ friendship
o A virtuous friend is one who loves us for our character, shares our moral values, and will help us become
more virtuous
o Three general reasons for thinking virtuous friendship is not possible in an online relationship
 People are hidden from one another online, and select with the elements of their personality to
share online
 The medium limits the possibility of shared experiences playing a role in virtue friendship
 Social networking sites impose a a particular form on our interactions with others
(brief/superficial) that precludes the possibility of a meaningful relationship
- Manufactured Identities:
o Argument 1: People online don’t reveal their true thoughts online (hence character)
  The internet creates extra communication filters, the internet precludes the possibility of direct
interaction—barriers inherent to the form of communication hinder ‘truly’ getting to know
another
 This concern is troubling for young people (ie. Followers create a false portrayal of
friends)
 Klarianta: The concern is misplaced, in the case of youth, who use the internet to connect with
individuals who are also friends offline.
 Klarianta: Facebook friends create profiles including real names and photos, providing a basis for
people to investigate friend’s identity using a search engine, and don’t depend exclusively on self-
provided information. Posted information will likely provide a basis for determining the degree to
which they are being genuine
 Klarianta: Mutual friends options allows for greater reliability to assess the trustworthiness of the
new friend
 Screening friends is commonplace now
 It remains possible to control your image online, especially in anonymous environments,
but the prevalence of these environments is waning
o Argument 2: Alice and Betty
 Alice wants to meet offline; Betty is reluctant. Alice coincidentally sees Betty (recognized from
online pictures) and sees that she’s physically disabled
 The conclusion is that alice and betty aren’t virtue friends, since alice was unable to make a
correct assessment of betty’s character
 Klarianta: Why is betty’s disability relevant to her moral character? Honesty is important, but
people can be affected by the perception of others
 This might be Positive since it provides an opportunity for completely Equal interaction
 Klarianta: A variety of the aspects of online relationships cited as problematic are often
problematic in the context of offline friendships
 Studies suggest that online friendships may increase the possibility of people acting as
their ‘true selves’ online
- No Shared Life
o One central element is that friends share multiple experiences
o Some argue that shared experience fail to match the robust and spontaneous character of experiences
offline
o Kaliarnta: There has been at least one study suggesting a variety of experiences in these sorts of games are
spontaneous and involve robust communication
o Kaliarnta: There is a reason to think that maintaining physical proximity to another is not necessary for
perfect friendship
 Aristotle said the most excellent activity friends can share is discussions of our favourite events
and our thoughts, which is easily available to online friends
 Sharing thoughts and discussions is what distinguishes us from animals
o Kaliarnta: Various forms of interaction facilitated by onloine activities would allow the type of sharing
Aristotle deems to be essential to virtue friendship
- Is an online friendship less valuable?
o Kaliarnta’s reasons
o The study sharp cites is not well constructed, and offers no supported claim about a connection between
the observed decrease in empathy and internet use
o Studies with a larger sample focused on the effects of the internet on empathy yields contrary results
o Twitter increases relationship satisfaction, and the development of more meaningful relationships with
people who are only accquaintances
o Data suggests that youth can recognize the difference between facebook friends and offline friends
o Friendships can lead to isolation of meaningful companionship?
 The bulk of social media network use involve maintaining relationships that already exist offline
 The chances of being deceived by a friend offline are similar to the chances of being deceived by a
potential friend online
- Is Aristotle’s Ideal fo Virtue Friendship applied plausibly to online friendships
o Generalizes a problem that Applies to all attempts to analyze online relationships
o There is no clear/widely accepted account of aristotles understanding of friendship
o Ambiguity to argue online relationships increase the chances of virtue friendships implies those who
suggest it isn’t possible, depend on a rigid interpretation of aristotles position
 o Even if friendships aren’t actually virtue friendships, they are still perceived as being worthwhile
o Denying virtue friendships cannot exist in the context of the internet is dismissive of the potential of those
friendships to contribute to the well-being and flourishing of those who undertake them

Week #5: Frost-Arnold/Wright/Munn

Arnold-Frost—Truth, Trust and Anonymity

- Anonymity has a greater positive effect than negative effect on the acquisition of human knowledge
- Epistemology: The study of knowledge
o Trying to determine the difference between knowing something, and what is necessary to make a true claim
to knowledge
- Thesis: The two dominant proposals for accountability mechanisms, improve the reliability of the truth of the
information circulated online, both threaten to undermine the collective development of true beliefs
- The Problem: Anonymity as a source of fales information
o The internet is not a reliable source of knowledge owing to the anonymity of it’s users
o Common solution: we need accountability mechanisms to preserve reliability
o Frost-Arnold’s Critique: The two popular proposals, reduce the dissemination of true beliefs and threaten
the capacity of the internet to weed out error
- Terms and Target:
o Knowledge on the internet reaches a large audience, and is unfettered by any type of quality control
o Sources of online knowledge include online encyclopedias and social networks
o Accountability Mechanisms: Attempt to provide rationally self-interested agents with negative incentives to
conform to some standard of behaviour
o The Norm: Trustworthiness, users should only communicate information they genuinely believe to be true
and held accountable if they circulate information they know to be false
o Frost’s Proposal: Mechanisms should reduce the frequency of falsehoods rather than improving user’s
abilities to discriminate true and false information
- Knowledge as a “True Belief”
o Human knowledge is a collective undertaking
o Veritism: What needs to be emphasized if humans are going to be capable of collecting reliable knowledge
 Highlights importance of true beliefs
 True beliefs are intrinsically and instrumentally valuable
o Versions of Veritism: Error avoiding, and truth seeking
 Error Avoidance: Will yield fewer accepted true beliefs
 Truth seeking: Will yield more accepted beliefs that are more likely to be false
- Anonymity and True Beliefs
o Acknowledges the real damaging effects online anonymity can pose
o Anonymity can undermine the possibility of circulating true beliefs online
o Internet information can be misconstrued at our whim
- Requiring Identities
o Method one for accountability: Requiring real world identities from users, will likely increase the reliability
of users who don’t want to undermine real-world reputations
 Problem: Loss of anonymity undermines the benefits it provides
 Empirical data shows: Increases the novelty and quantity of ideas shared
 Anonymity increases contributions from those who are vulnerable and fear retaliation
undermining the participation of marginalized groups
 The above two appeal to truth seeking veritists but not error avoiding
 Anonymity can contribute to reducing error, diversity facilitates diverse critical engagement
 Predjudice causes some publications to be undervalued, anonymity ensures predjudice does not
undervalue contributions from marginalized groups
 Absence of civility might undermine the benefits of anonymity
- Investigating Identities
o Method two for accountability: Investigative, means regulate by means of a threat
o Problems:
  Inefficient: Draws resources away from efforts for truth-seeking and error-avoiding
 Dampening effect: Reduces the frequency of novel and surprizing claims
 The above would hinder truth seeking and criticisms that identify previously
unrecognized errors
 Will most likely affect oppressed/marginalized groups
o The amina hoax: Was uncovered by means of an investigation, it helped establish truth but had a profound
negative effect
- Room for Adjustment?
o It may be possible to rely on investigative accountability mechanisms if:
 A further mechanism exists to reduce bias
 A better solution would be to reduce the need for investigation by promoting altruistic and pro-
social behaviour
 People tend away from dishonesty if they do not gain from it. The harms of online
dishonesty should be made more apparent
 People avoid dishonest behaviour when they reflect on moral values. Online
communities could include reminders on the values they support
o Problem: They undermine the diversity of views fostered by the anonymity of the internet
Wright: Self-Censorship and the reliability of public discourse online
- Democracy: The goal is to engage in arguments about which policy to implement, discourse will yield the best policy
choice
- The structure of the internet: The freedom of users to determine the information they consume, creates a significant
obstacle to the possibility of truth
- Thesis: Input-side self censorship is an object of concern for those who believe democratic debate ields the best
government policies and is amplified by the internet. Promoting the pursuit of truth as a responsibility/virtue of
citizens in democratic societies is one means by which input-side self censorship could be reduced.
- Censorship and the importance of democratic discourse:
o Input side censorship undermines the possibility of truth emerging from democratic debate
o Fear of censorship is often formal, official censorship is not the only means of censorship.
o All social groups can exercize informal, but effective forms of censorship
o John Stuart Mill: Penalties of informal censorship are less extreme, social mechanisms can have a greater
censoring effect on individuals
o Input side self Censorship: When an individual restricts consumption/engagement in discourse intentionally
or unintentionly, to only those opinions the individual shares
 Consists in choosing to restrict the character of information consumed
- Self-Censorship before the internet
o Cas Sunstein: When like minded individuals restrict themselves to information that confirms their own
view, conversations within the group reinforce the view and lead to more extreme versions
o Democracy relies on participants critically scrutinizing their opponent’s views
o If people construct self imposed barriers, they become unable to recognize the best arguments in favour of
competing political positions
o Mill Maintains: We must know the arguments supporting the opposing view as presented by their
defenders, to properly understand and assess the opposing position
 We cant know if we don’t know all the reasons for the opposing view since we cannot compare
competing reasons
o Homogenous groups reinforce and systematize their own errors of reasoning. They produce non-ideal
political beliefs
o Input side self censorship: Can be explained by confirmation bias; seeking out information that confirms
their position to give it more significance than contradictory information
- How the Internet Amplifies the above reasoning problems
o The advent of the internet suggests the concern about input-side self-censorship ought to be even greater
o Problem 1: Given the internet is the increased ease with which self-censorship can be accomplished. Users
are free to choose from an increasingly vast selection of information
 Self censorship is what many users engage in when online. They consider fewer diverse views and
give themselves fewer opportunities to encounter opposing views
 The limited scope of views is influenced by the structure of the internet
o Problem 2: Few studies suggest there is less self-segregation on the internet, although they cannot identify
what it is users are viewing when visiting sites expressing opposing views
  Bolsters the claimn that it threatens the reliability of discourse as a means of generating the best
social policies
- Truth as a Civic Virtue:
o Strategy 1: Promoting the idea that seeking out truth is a civic virtue
 To participate in the democratic process, in a manner that contributes to the realization of the
benefits of democracy, it is our responsibility to inform ourselves of opposing positions to reliably
weigh the alternatives
 The pursuit will be likely to develop more nuanced positions
 Ensures whatever partisan view we endorse is not arbitrary
o The promise of the internet is to improve human knowledge, and the character of political discourse is not
being fulfilled, owing to self-censorship
Munn—Truth and Political Reporting Online
- Freedom of the press is consideredto be a fundamental feature of a democratic society
o It is the means by which most democratic societies are provided information about the activities of their
government
o The political blogosphere is contributing to the fundamental role of a free press
- Thesis: Contrary to the views defended by goldman and Posner, the political blogosphere has replicated the
advantages of mainstream media and provides independently valuable content that enhances the character of
democratic political debate
- The Character of Epistemic Democracy
o The exchange of ideas democracy demands improves citizen’s ability to ‘track the truth’ of political claims,
leading to the best possible government
o The outcome preferred by the majority is most epistemically desirable, it will yield the best policy so long as
they are well-informed
- Truth and the Mainstream Media
o Mainstream media: Refers to newspaper, television, and radio news as well as the corporations that own
them
o New Media: refers to online sources, primarily blogs that are free and exclusively online
o For goldman, there are four primary benefits the MM provides, integral to the possibility of democracy,
since democracy depends on an informed population
- Four benefits of MM
o It provides widespread truthful information, provide an opportunity to read/believe/absorb the truths they
identify
 If the blogosphere does not replicate the widespread provision of truth, democracy will suffer
o It is widely available, but the costs are significant
o It serves a fact-checking role, increasing the chances that the information they report is not false
 Goldman argues that the blogosphere does not do this, or does not do it well
o The MM is a credible source, since it is trusted by the general public as an accurate source of information
- Truth and The political Blogosphere
o Section 1:
 The MM is being replaced by blogs, and it is a negative development
 The blogosphere relies on content generated by the MM, but it diminishes the continuity of the
MM
 Goldman predicts: The MM will collapse, leading to the collapse of the blogosphere and
diminishing political knowledge. Leading to an inferior system of government
 Goldman argues: The blogosphere is unfiltered. The benefit of filtering by the MM is that it
reduces the numbers of false claims presented as truth to the public, and yields an amount of
information that is manageable
o Section 2:
 On Posner;s account, bloggers jeapardize the professional constraints of MM
 In reality: They are run by former MM journalists
 Have been absorbed by MM
 Have been incorporated and adopt the same standards of professionalism as MM
o Section 3:
 Goldmans critique: the blogosphere is amateurish, blogs that are biased fail to properly fact-check
information they present, and are not bound by professional standard
 Critique: The MM is buying up the blogosphere
 Values of bloggers are approximating those of MM, they are being held to those standards by
readers
o Section 4
 The blogosphere is being absorbed by MM structure
 MM is creating it’s own blogs, and hiring bloggers as employees
- The advantages of the Blogosphere
o Echo Chambers and Sounding Boards:
 Echo chamber occurs when a media outlet uncritically relays a policy position taken by the
government
 There is no reason to think this is more prevalent in the blogosphere than MM
 Sounding board involves the presentation of ideas in an effort ta gage public responses
  Bloggers engage directly in dialogye they are in a better position to serve this function than MM
o Error Correction
 Bloggers have better correction mechanisms than MM, owing to the sheer number of blogs
combined with direct interactions bloggers have with readers and other blogs
 The ability of readers to observe the reasoning process relied upon to articulate and defend
competing positions

Week 6: Bowie/Mokrosinska
Bowie—Privacy on the Internet
- Focuses on the degree to which individuals are/should be concerned to exert control over their personal
information online
- Concerns our “rights to Privacy”, and allows them to control their personal information, imposes duty on others
not to interfere with that control
o “Right to Privacy” is unique; there is very little information we think individuals or corporations ought to be
able to exert exclusive control over
o The one apparent exception is personal information
- Thesis: The primary ethical concerns about privacy to which the internet gives rise, are paradoxical: in some cases the
internet allows too much control over private information, and in others too little
- Privacy Defined:
o The right to privacy, is commonly accepted as independent of the internet
o The possibility of enjoying a right to privacy entails control, over the information about yourself that others
can access
o Moral significance: The role that it plays in individual autonomy, and the autonomy to choose the nature of
relationships
o Our capacity to choose what to share is regarded as a degree of control that is morally protected; it is an
internal freedom
- Too much control over Private Information
o Describes one sense in which the internet protects privacy too much
o Internet affords a great deal of autonomy
o Facilitates sexual predators, cyber bullying, and can be used to harass/entrap public figures by spreading
false information
o i.e. Laws agains libel and slander don’t help, since they protect websites from lawsuits, and individuals in
question are anonymous
- Too Little Control Over Private Information
o Describes several ways in which the internet does not adequately protect private information
o Criticisms of unethical practices prompted the introduction of ‘Opt-out Policies’ that are not typically
chosen by users
 Too little control is actually a lack of demand for control
o Cookies are a failure to protect privacy
 They store information about which websites you visit
 Information is used by marketers, which we have no control over
o Search Engines are under no legal obligation to delete your search history, or refrain from selling it to
other corporations
o It is possible for individuals to post private pictures without consent
- The internet doesn’t provide you control over your physical image

Mokrosinska—The Scope of Citizens’ Online Privacy from Government

Surveillance in a Liberal Democracy
- Applies uniquely to Liberal Democratic Societies
- Responds to a classic problem for democracies: When/Why are governments permitted to interfere with individual
citizens
o Concerned by mass surveillance of online behaviour
- Thesis: Given the degree to which decisional and informational privacy are necessary conceptual elements of a liberal
framework, democratic governments ought to restrict their online surveillance of citizens to instances that can be
publicly justified
- The Benefits of Online Surveillance over the Protection of Online Privacy
o Mass surveillance is justified on the basis of the social benefits they yield
o Privacy concerns raised concerning surveillance rarely lead to meaningful privacy protections confirming
that the value of privacy is outweighed by political benefits
o Two kinds of privacy are integral to liberal democracy:
 Decisional: Commitments and choices are protected from interference
 Informationall privacy: Individuals are entitled to control personal information, free of
interference
- The significance of Privacy to the Possibility of Social Relations
o There are competing understandings of the significance of privacy for social relationships
o Strategies for protecting privacy are understood as opposed to social interaction; they involve a withdrawal
from social engagement
o Social science data contradicts this position
o No reason to believe empirically that decisional privacy and informational privacy between persons must
exist for a social relation to exist
- Scientists, Rather than Philosophers, on the social role of privacy
o Describes the specific role Nissenbaum maintains privacy plays in social relations
o Some philosophers have recognized the significance of privacy, most have not
o Helen Nissenbaum: Decisional and informational privacy are necessary for the purposes of a social
relationship
 It is not appropriate for a patient to ask details concerning a therapists emotional state—It would
undermine the goal of the relationship
 Democratic citizens can only vote according to preference, if and when their decision is not
subject to pressure. So votes should be kept private.
o Social relations depend on privacy, byt political relations are a form of social relation. It follows that
 Political relations will also depend on privacy
 Violation of that privacy threatens those relations
- The Contingent Political Importance of Privacy
o Some philosophers think privacy is important to develop autonomous judgement, others to keep public
discourse free from unnecessarily disruptive ideas
o These justifications suffer problems: They depend on historical and contingent circumstances of particular
societies
o Privacy is necessary element of political legitimacy owing to the role it plays in the formulation of public
justifications
- Public Justifications and Liberalism
o For state authority to be legitimate according to liberalism, it must be supported by public justification
 State authority must be justifiable to the persons living within it
o Two themes:
 Justification mut be able to be presented to all citizens independently of competing
views/preferences/conceptions of the good life individuals hold, so they can be accepted
irrespective of differences
 The need to provide justification of authority, is to preserve stability and ensure that the views of
all are given equal weight
o If privacy is necessary, it must play a necessary conceptual role in the liberal account of political legitimacy
- The Necessary Conceptual Role of Privacy in Public Justifications
o The notion of public justification presupposes an understanding of privacy
o Liberalism understands politics as an area where people divided by deep personal differences are
nonetheless able to reach agreement on political matters
o Two constraints on the character of any possible justification
 Only reasons which can be presented to all reasonable citizens can be invoked
 Individuals must refrain from presenting reasons in terms that others could not accept
o By imposing restrictions, liberalism identifies the rules of concealement and disclosure between actors
engaging in a political relationship
o Liberal desire determines what reasons are acceptable; although reasonable disagreement is possible
- Whats the Role of Liberalism
 o Privacy refers to any consideration that cant be included with a public justification
o An unwillingness to try to present reasons others could accept is an abandonment of public justification
 i.e. Racism refuses to recognize the equal freedom of all, is unreasonable
o Only to the extent that these views do not interfere with the public sphere by violating political rights of
others; when and to the extend that they do harm, they are not permissible
- Liberal Privacy beyond Racists and Sexists
o Two models of public justification yielding different accounts of what counts as private information
 A public justification constrains the content of permissible reasons; those that can be mutually
accepted are permissible, those that cannot should be kept private
 Public justification constrains the process of reasoning, we cannot determine what counts as a
public reason in advance
o Example: religious beliefs should be kept private since they cant be agreed upon, and only to be kept private
if they cannot be shown to be consistent with like liberty for all
- Liberal Privacy and Government Surveillance:
o Certain commitments, lifestyles, and beliefs are inconsistent with liberal political discourse, they manifest
online or offline, and should be free from government oversight
o Government surveillance requires increasing yielded surveillance of entire religious communities
o Liberal states have the authority to curb terrorist activities
 This does not apply when no evidence exists, that individuals are or intend to engage in
misconduct
 Well grounded suspicions can be publicly justified
 In the absence of that justification, surveillance undermines the coherence of liberalism as a
political idea

Week 7: Parker, Willinsky, Mauthner/Parry

Parker—The ethical Status of Open Access for Ethics Researchers
- Discusses the degree to which scholars are under a moral obligation to relinquish control over their data
- Thesis: Given the importance of public deliberation to the practice of ethics, scholars working in ethics have a unique
interest in promoting open access publishing
- Introduction
o Subscription based journals impose limits on access to academic knowledge
o This publishing model has not been questioned with regard to ethical research
o Is ironic since public deliberation in ethics/the fact that arguments in support of open access cast as ethical
requirements
- Arguments for Open Access
o Open access will increase the production of scientific knowledge and reduce duplication
 Ethical contributions must often be timely
 E.g. Changing government policy demands public ethical engagement
 This approach will increase the number of arguments for/against a particular policy proposal
o Reciprocity—Since public tax dollars pay for research, the results NEED to be made available to the public
 Subscription based models restrict access to knowledge to those in academic institutions/those
with a means to subscribe independently
 Reciprocity is a legitimate moral demand, especially in low income settings
 Making research available reflects the social value of understanding and engaging knowledge
production
o Unfairness—Subscription based model is unfair
 It relies on the free labour of academics
 Restricts access/decides who gets to be a knowledge producer
o It is overly conservative
 Encourages all academic scholarship to be produced by certain people in specific ways
 Open access encourages new forms of publication
 Encourages a more diverse set of submissions
 Encourages a more creative and robust community of scholars
- Arguments Against Open Access
 o Empirically, there is no guarantee open access will generate higher quality research
 Open access might not maintain the etiquette required for a collaborative undertaking that gives
each contributor the recognition they are due
o The ‘Gold Model’
 Academic institutions cover costs of open access publishing
 Is problematic because publishers continue to profit by way of tax dollars
o The gold model gives private firms unlimited access to use publicly funded knowledge without imposing any
reciprocal requirement that those private uses be disclosed
o The costs associated with ensuring the quality of open access journals may yield a conservative narrowing
since well-audited and highly prized journals may emerge as dominant
o The gold model will disadvantage less well-funded institutions
- Open Access Wins
o Those working in the field have a strong incentive to favour open access
Willinsky and Alperin—The ethical obligation to rely on open access in
academia
- Thesis: Academics are under an ethical obligation to disseminate their research as widely as possible, which means
publishing in an open access format
- The character of ethical analyses in education discourse—Restricting or Encouraging Action
o They identify positive moral requirements instead of negative moral prohibitions
o The problem with analysing negative responsibilities—once a solution has been devised, the ethical issues
to which it gives rise will disappear
o The primary positive duty of universities is a function of the primary goal of the university—The production
and transmission of knowledge
o It is a time-sensitive debate. Publishing models are in a state of flux, but once this is resolved a more stable
model will take hold
- The existing State of Affairs in Academic publishing
o Under the current for-profit based method of publication, there are obstacles to research being distributed
as widely and fairly as possible
o Originally, for-profit peer reviewed journals was the only means of ensuring reliable knowledge would be
circulated as widely as possible
o Open access changes the possibilities—it imposes obligations to contemplate how their research could be
circulated to a broader audience
o Opponents to open access raise concerns about the economic viability of these schemes as well as the
possible erosion of quality they might yield
- The Ethical risk is overstated
o There is little evidnce suggesting that a shift to open access would lead to the demise of scholarship
o The average cost for scholar-publishers is 200$, the average cost for for profit publishers is 3000$
o This places the financial burden on the publishers side, not the subscription side
o The effects of this commercialization will need to be investigated
o A third alternative: Self-archiving—publishers allow authors to make their articles public after peer-review.
The costs are insignificant and the quality is preserved
 This suggests they recognize the ethical imperative of open access
 It facilitates the speed at which research is disseminated
o Publishers have not reported a decrease in subscription revenues—open access schemes can be
economically viable without creating an ethical dilemma that endangers the publishing process
- The Ethical Value of Open Access
o Open access increases the consumption of academic knowledge, data suggests it is
o Increased circulation may be construed as a problem because it facilitates lower quality research to satisfy
the vanity of scholars
o The impact on open access on developing nations cannot be overstated. It enables them to access
knowledge to which they previously would not have had access
o Restricting access by means of economic obstacles is not an ethical response—The ethical response is to
promote the scrutiny of knowledge
 Supported by the adoption of policies requiring researchers to post in open access archives
 If work could genuinely harm the public, access should be restricted
o The primary motivation to increase access to produced knowledge eis a function of increasing demands for
knowledge, and the right to knowledge
o It is morally wrong to restrict access to knowledge by economic means, there is a great deal of moral value
that can be gleaned from making it widely and freely accessible
Mauthner and Parry—The Obstacles to Open Access Data Sharing
- Thesis: Data sharing policies are not morally benign but rather depend on a flawed understanding of collaborative
research in the natural and social sciences, an understanding that fails to accommodate its relational character
- Policies and Research
o Policies require open access publication, researchers have resisted complying with those policies
o Digital databases are a valuable source of scientific data—governments have begun to mandate data
preservation and sharing
o The principle basis for the above; “publicly funded research data should be openly available to the
maximum extent possible”
o Academics in the social and natural sciences have resisted to comply
- Open Access:
o The push toward open access began in the 1960’s, and became more widespread in the 1990’s with
improvements in digital technologies
o Open access is a public good
o The only restrictions policy makers should apply to data are national security, confidentiality, intellectual
property, and exclusive use by principal investigators
 Government funding agencies require that data be shared publicly
o Requiring open access to research is typically the scientific, moral economic, political, social and security
benefits it provides, democratizes knowledge, and promotes global empowerment of researchers
 In science, the benefits are the promotion of transparency, innovation and progress
o The moral argument: since research is funded by the public and produced for public purposes it should be
made available to the public
- Resistance to Open Access
o Research suggests that scholars have sought to avoid and delay fulfilling their obligations to make their data
freely available to the public
o Informed consent grants researchers an ignorant blanket permission to use data however they choose
o Oppositely, those restrictions hinder the scientific value of the data
o Researchers have expressed concern, regarding the degree that open access undermines their ability to
control the data they’ve produced
- The Nature of the Obstacles to Open Access
o Such policies have encountered resistance since they don’t reflect the relational character of research
o Most address the resistance as a technical problem, improvements in infrastructure perpetuating the
system should yield greater compliance
o These solutions have not yielded desired results
o Communities continue to resist; an odd result given the widespread professed support for open access and
the existing tendency to engage in data sharing
o The policies themselves impose a loss of control of data researchers produce
o Policies of the OECD, treat data as contextually independent of the researchers who produce it, rather than
in terms of the relationship between data and persons who produce it
 Conflicting since an element of research is for scholars to interpret their data in a determinate
context
 Uninterpreted data has little value outside that context
o There is a relation between researcher and research that is ignored in open access policies
o Moral Arguments: Draw on utilitarianism and deontology, which frame the moral obligations in terms of
universal principles that are impersonal
 The problem; there is an assumed separation between researcher and research—explaining the
emotional attachments of researchers to their research, and the desire toe xert control over the
manner of its use
o Researchers are often concerned with their obligation to subjects and fellow researchers than the public
 This concern is guided by an ethic of care, a focus not reflected in open access policies—they deny
researchers control over their data and a desire to protect subject identities
o Three notable political concerns
 Researchers may be concerned about the degree to which the availability of data can be used to
exacerbate existing social power imbalances
 Researchers are resisting ceding control of data to government agencies, since doing so erodes
their authority and autonomy in respect of that research
  Policies are insensitive to the reality that most data collection is performed by junior researchers
(who are unlikely to make complete use of the data they collect)
- A better form of policy
o What sort of policy would better reflect the relationship between researcher and research
o Researchers engage in a significant amount of informal and interpersonal data sharing practices, policies
reflecting those practices are more likely to succeed
o Policies should encourage rather than require data sharing, granting researchers greater discretion/control
over their work
o Granting researchers control over their data are more likely to overcome resistance even though they may
increase the cost of the open access project

Week 8: The Wrongness of online piracy

Graham—What is property
- Property Rights and the moral status of control
o Right of control assumes that those who produce content gain a property right in the content they produce
o Digital realm is a mechanism for communicating and storing information
o Graham on open access: Who is morally entitled to exert control and how should that control be exerted
o These questions have existed in respect of property
 Legal property applied to stuff, land, moveable possession
o To own something legally means the owner can assert three sorts of right that serve as a form of control
 The right to exclude non owners
 The right to use property
 The right to transfer ownership
o Information could be understood as ‘stuff’ so piracy violates all three rights
 The owner still possesses their stuff if it is copied online
 It just means the pirate possesses it as well
o Priacy affects the control that rights are intended to provide to owners
- The Changing Character of Property
o Property in the context of the internet is distinct from its normal physical form, a change that makes it
impossible to treat music and movies as property
 Piracy is morally permissible by implication of this thesis
- A conception of property must be consistent with the social order
o Begins with an analogy: Its ridiculous to think that smells could be made into property
 There is no way to control the supply or distribution of smells
o The definition of property can change, music and movie studios used to have control over the supply and
distribution of their product but they no longer do (data moves like smells now)
o Producers should charge for content only when doing so works
o Proposals for legal change would break the internet and warp society, so their redefined understanding
does not work and should be disregarded
Roberts—A Case Against internet software piracy
o Not focused on proprietary interests of music and movie content, but focuses on the degree that software
developers are entitled to have their proprietary interests protected
o Opposed to Graham’s position—piracy does violate the rights of content producers and morally
impermissible
- Thesis: Pirating software is morally wrong
- Piracy is ethical
o Information ought to be free, software is a form of information therefore software ought to be free. It can
be freely reproduced and distributed
 COunterarguent: Piracy does cause harm—money and jobs have been lost, a harm that increases
each time something is unrightfully downloaded
o We should host pirated software on the grounds that doing so is a form of expression. Doing so is protected
as a constitutional right
 Copying without paying violates the rights of those whove created the software to derive a profit
 o There are no victims of piracy—Software prices are so high that others will pay, and the manufacturers will
lose little
 Offering pirated software is not protected speech since the constitution does not protect illegal
activities, nor all forms of speech
o Software is often flawed, there is no crime in taking it
 The fact that a car has flaws doesn’t grant a licence to steal it
o We should pay if/when we decide we like it
 Software prices are higher owing to piracy
Theft in a Wireless World—Small
- Thesis: Even though wifi tactily encourages users to borrow internet connections, this practice is a clear example of
theft
- How to Characterize unauthorized network use
o The prevalence of borrowing wifi is impossible to determine since it occurs undetected, so it is worth
determining whether it qualifies as theft
o Most wireless networks transmit Beyond their scope of use, they have encryption technology which is easy
to crack and not enabled by default
o Users choose not to engage encryption features, they think doing so will render the network inoperable
o Wireless networks provide easy unauthorized access, but is that access theft?
- Theft Defined
o Theft dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving
the other of the property
o Three necessary sufficient conditions of theft can be inferred
 The perpetrator must viokate the property right of the owner by depriving the owner of its use
 The perpetrator must intend that deprivation
 The perpetrator must act dishonestly
- Four Arguments that unauthorized wifi use is not theft
o By leaving the network unsecured, the owner shows a willingness to share
 The fact of an unsecured network doesn’t support an inviation to use
 Na open window or door doesn not qualify an invitation to enter
o In at least one instance, software came with an automatic network connection algorithm, assuming that
unsecured connections implicitly welcome users

o The radio signal from the network is a trespass of the freeloaders property, acces is something freeloaders
are entitled to as compensatio0n
 If the wireless owner is actually trespassing that does not necessitate compensation, especially
not compensation unilaterally chosen by the freeloader
 The law excludes neighbours from using fruit that trespasses on their land, it would preclude
benefitting from the wireless network of another
o The radio signal is form of common/shared property like a public park
 Even in a public park people retain their property rights
 Using the wireless signal of another intentionally appropriates the owner’s signal without regard
to their desires, depriving them of controlling interest in the signal
- How Technology is culpable in the theft
o The character of the technology dealing with wifi is partially responsible for the view that borrowing is not
theft
 The technology conflates a distinction between unsecured and free access for all
 Manufacturers have not made encryption the default
 Microsoft was ethically responsible for their computer that made automatic connection default
o Wifi tech has created a new form of theft allowing well intentioned users to steal, and malicious thieves to
justify their actions
o Manufacturers of new systems need to engage in value-sensitive designs that predict and minimize morally
problematic practices
Week 9: Online Hacking
The meaning of online hacking—Blankenship
- Hacker was a term of respect popularized by computer experts at MIT
- A hacker is: A person exploring the details of programmable systes and how to stretch their capabilities
o Has its roots in the academic culture of sharing
- Hackers are united by a common belief: Information sharing is a positive good it is an ethical duty of hackers to share
their expertise by writing open source code and facilitating access to information/computing resources wherever
possible
o Original hackers were committed to the free-flow of information
- One who enjoys the challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations
o The belief that system cracking for fun and exploration is ethically ok, as long as the cracker commits no
theft, vandalism or breach of confidentiality
- When limits started being placed on digital information, hackers began testing those limits
- Hackers Versus Crackers
o Since people with malicious intent got hold of the technical knowledge for hacking
o We need to distinguish between hackers and crackers
o True hackers consider crackers a separate and lower form of life
o Black hat hackers; those who have the technical knowledge and malicious intent
o Script kiddies: Those who have little knowledge and stumble into these things causing harm
- The Mentor—The Hackers Manifesto
o Was written by a hacker named Lloyd Blankenship
o It is a descriptive statement of hacker culture that has taken on the significance of a definition of that
culture
o Three points:
 Hackers perceive themselves as participating in a form of counter-culture
 Hackers are individualists—they are attracted to the control they can exert over systems, and
explore the limits of those systems
 They resent/work against the restrictions placed on access to information technology—since costs
would be much lower if control were not in the hands of for-profit corporations or governments
The Ethical Way to teach hacking—Pike
- How can hacking be taught in a way that encourages exerting control over computers without violating the right to
control held by those who own those systems
- Thesis: Ethical hacking’ should be a significant component of cybersecurity education at universities, focusing
specifically on the construction of strong ethical frameworks for peer-groups, competition, recognition, and ongoing
skill development.
- Background:
o White hat hackers; Committed to full compliance with legal/regulatory statutes as well as published ethical
frameworks
o Black Hat hackers: Ignores or defies legal/regulatory statutes with little interest in ethical frameworks
o Given that student hacking is on the rise, there is reason to worry computer science programs don’t provide
students tools for making ethical decisions
o Schools have started to offer “ethical hacking” courses motivated by the belief that illegal computing skills
taught will be uses for the greater good
 Goals of these courses should be to protect students
 Students are unaware of the dangers associated with their activities
- Method and Results
o Identifies the considerations that should be entertained when teaching ethical hacking
o Pike undertook an empirical survey of cyber-security professionals
o Three experts recommended a series of interviews with information security professionals to determine
what activities foster ethical hacking
o 206 interviews took place, each person was asked whether they though hacking should be taught, and if
they had specific recommendations for how to teach it ethically
o Any recommendation made by 25% of participants served as a discussion
 o All 206 participants unanimously asserted ethical hacking should be taught
o Four categories met the 25% threshold
- Social Interaction
o They cybersecurity community is a community: both white and black hat hackers depend on shared
knowledge/collaborative skill development
o White hat hackers are concerned with the law, and need to develop ethical frameworks to ensure their
activities are properly rule-guided
o Social identity theory maintains individuals make choices on the terms set by their peers
o Reccomendation 1: White hat hacking student peer groups with an ethical code guided by legal rules,
should be created to reduce unethical student activities
- Formal Competition
o How do the benefits of competition transfer to ethical hacking
 Competition gives insight into potential careers, which would be disrupted by criminal convictions
 Competitions are sometimes focused on resolving an ethical dilemma
 Competitions give a sense of the breadth of the white-hat community strengthening social
interactions that influence their behaviour
 Competitions help clarify the difference between white and black hat hacking
o Reccomendation 2: White hat hacking competitions should be encouraged/promoted/developed
- Recognition
o Hackers want to be recognized; so much so that a lack of recognition among white-hats drives some to
black hat
o Reccomendation 3: Leaderboards should be introduced into cybersecurity programs to reduce the chance
of black hat activity in pursuit of recognition
- Skill development
o Hackers constantly need to upgrade skills to fullfill desires as hackers
o Their tendency to to enter a state of flow is gratified by constantly solvinf new problems
o Reccomendation 4: Academic challenges that move from simple to complex and thereby match the
student’s ever-increasing skill level need to be created, so as to reduce the tendency that either bored or
overly confused students will resort to black-hat activity