Professional

Ethics (EA-219)
Ms. Muzaina Wasi
 LESSON OBJECTIVES
By the end of Lecture 01, you will be able to:

Understand Moral theories in professional

ethics.

Understand key ethical theories and their relevance

to computer system engineering.

Critically think and reflect on ethical

theories and be able to those in situations
that you may encounter in your future
careers.
 Moral Theories in Professional Ethics.
▪ Ethical theories provide part of the decision-making foundation for Decision Making When Ethics Are In Play
because these theories represent the viewpoints from which individuals seek guidance as they make
decisions.
▪ Each theory emphasizes different points – a different decision-making style or a decision rule—such as
predicting the outcome and following one’s duties to others to reach what the individual considers an ethically
correct decision.
▪ In order to understand ethical decision-making, it is important to realize that not everyone makes decisions in
the same way, using the same information, and employing the same decision rules.
▪ To further understand the ethical theory, there must be some understanding of a common set of goals that
decision-makers seek to achieve to be successful. Four of these goals include beneficence, least harm, respect
for autonomy, and justice.
 ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
1. Beneficence
▪ The principle of beneficence guides the decision-maker to do what is right and good. This priority to “do
good” makes an ethical perspective and possible solution to an ethical dilemma acceptable.
▪ This principle is also related to the principle of utility, which states that we should attempt to generate the
largest ratio of good over evil possible in the world.
▪ This principle stipulates that ethical theories should strive to achieve the greatest amount of good because
people benefit from the most good.
▪ It is mainly associated with the utilitarian ethical theory discussed later in this set of notes.
 ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
Least Harm

▪ Similar to beneficence, least harm deals with situations in which no choice appears beneficial.
▪ In such cases, decision-makers seek to choose to do the least harm possible and to do harm to the fewest
people.
▪ People might argue that people have a greater responsibility to “do no harm” than to take steps to benefit
others. For example, a student has a larger responsibility to simply walk past a teacher in the hallway rather
than to make derogatory remarks about that teacher as he/she walks past even though the student had failed
that teacher’s class.
 ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
Respect for Autonomy
▪ This principle states that decision-making should focus on allowing people to be autonomous—to be able to make
decisions that apply to their lives.
▪ Thus, people should have control over their lives as much as possible because they are the only people who
completely understand their chosen type of lifestyle.
▪ Are there limits to autonomy? Each individual deserves respect because only he/she has had those exact life
experiences and understands his emotions, motivations, and physical capabilities in such an intimate manner.
▪ In essence, this ethical principle is an extension of the ethical principle of beneficence because a person who is
independent usually prefers to have control over his life experiences in order to obtain the lifestyle that he/she
enjoys.
 ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
Justice
▪ The justice ethical principle states that decision-makers should focus on actions that are fair to those involved.
▪ This means that ethical decisions should be consistent with the ethical theory unless extenuating circumstances that
can be justified exist in the case.
▪ This also means that cases with extenuating circumstances must contain a significant and vital difference from similar
cases that justify the inconsistent decision.

▪ For individuals, the ethical theory they employ for decision-making guidance emphasizes aspects of an ethical
dilemma important to them and leads them to the most ethically correct resolution according to the guidelines
within the ethical theory itself.
▪ Four broad categories of ethical theory include deontology, utilitarianism, rights, and virtues.
Moral Theories in Professional
Ethics.
▪
1. Rights Ethics
In ethical theories based on rights, the rights established by society are protected and given the highest priority.
▪ Rights are considered to be ethically correct and valid since a large population endorses them.
▪ Individuals may also bestow rights upon others if they have the ability and resources to do so.
▪ For example, a person may say that her friend may borrow her laptop for the afternoon. The friend who was given the
ability to borrow the laptop now has a right to the laptop in the afternoon.
▪ A major complication of this theory on a larger scale is that one must decipher what the characteristics of a right are in
a society. The society has to determine what rights it wants to uphold and give to its citizens.
▪ For a society to determine what rights it wants to enact, it must decide what the society’s goals and ethical priorities
are.
▪ Therefore, in order for the rights theory to be useful, it must be used in conjunction with another ethical theory that
will consistently explain the goals of the society.
▪ For example in America, people have the right to choose their religion because this right is upheld in the Constitution.
One of the goals of the Founding Fathers of America was to uphold this right to freedom of religion.
 2. Deontology/ Duty Ethics
▪ The deontological class of ethical theories states that people should adhere to their obligations and duties when
engaged in decision-making when ethics are in play. This means that a person will follow his or her obligations to
another individual or society because upholding one’s duty is what is considered ethically correct.
▪ For instance, a deontologist will always keep his promises to a friend and will follow the law.
▪ A person who adheres to deontological theory will produce very consistent decisions since they will be based on the
individual’s set duties.
▪ Deontology contains many positive attributes, but it also contains flaws. One flaw is that there is no rationale or logical
basis for deciding an individual’s duties. For instance, a businessperson may decide that it is his/her duty to always be
on time for meetings. Although this appears to be something good, we do not know why the person chose to make
this his duty.
▪ Sometimes, a person’s duties conflict. For instance, if the business person who must be on time for meetings is
running late, how is he/she supposed to drive? Is speeding breaking his/her duty to society to uphold the law, or is the
businessperson supposed to arrive at the meeting late, not fulfilling the duty to be on time?

▪ How they would rectify the conflicting obligations to arrive at a clear ethically correct resolution. Also, consider the
welfare of others as a result of the business person’s decision.
 3. Utilitarianism
▪ Utilitarian ethical theories are based on one’s ability to predict the consequences of an action. To a utilitarian, the
choice that yields the greatest benefit to the most people is the ethically correct one.
▪ There are two types of utilitarianism, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism.
▪ Act utilitarianism subscribes precisely to the definition of utilitarianism—a person performs the acts that benefit the
most people, regardless of personal feelings or societal constraints such as laws.
▪ Rule utilitarianism takes into account the law and is concerned with fairness. A rule utilitarian seeks to benefit the
most people but through the fairest and most just means available.
▪ Therefore, added benefits of rule utilitarianism are that it values justice and includes beneficence at the same time.
Both act and rule utilitarianism have disadvantages. Although people can use their life experiences to attempt to
predict outcomes, no one can be certain that his/her predictions will be accurate. Uncertainty can lead to unexpected
results making the utilitarian decision maker appear unethical as time passes, as the choice made did not benefit the
most people as predicted.
 3. Utilitarianism
▪ Another assumption that a utilitarian decision-maker must make concerns his/her ability to compare the various
types of consequences against each other on a similar scale. But, comparing material gains, such as money, against
intangible gains, such as happiness, is very difficult since their qualities differ to such a large extent.
▪ An act utilitarian decision maker is concerned with achieving the maximum good. Thus, one individual’s rights may
be infringed upon to benefit a greater number of people.
▪ In other words, act utilitarianism is not always concerned with justice, beneficence or autonomy for an individual if
oppressing the individual leads to a solution that benefits a majority of people.
 3. Utilitarianism
▪ Still another source of challenge with act utilitarian decision-makers occurs when an individual faces one set of
variable conditions and then suddenly experiences changes in those conditions. The change in conditions may lead to
a change in the original decision—being nice to someone one moment and then disliking them the next moment
because the situation has changed, and liking the person is no longer beneficial to most people.
▪ In rule utilitarianism, there is the possibility of conflicting rules. Recall the example of the business person running late
for a meeting. Suppose the business person happens to be the CEO, who may believe that it is ethically correct to
arrive at important meetings on time as the members of the company will benefit from this decision. The CEO may
encounter conflicting ideas about what is ethically correct if he/she is running late. Yet, the CEO believes that he/she
should follow the law because this benefits society. Simultaneously, he/she believes that it is ethically correct to be on
time for his meeting because it is a meeting that also benefits society. There appears to be no ethically correct answer
for this scenario.
 4. Virtue
▪ The virtue ethical theory judges a person by his/her character rather than by an action that may deviate from his/her
normal behavior. It takes the person’s morals, reputation, and motivation into account when rating an unusual and
irregular behavior that is considered unethical.
▪ For instance, if a person plagiarized a passage that was later detected by a peer, the peer who knows the person well
will understand the person’s character and will judge the friend accordingly. If the plagiarizer normally follows the rules
and has good standing amongst his colleagues, the peer who encounters the plagiarized passage may be able to judge
his friend more leniently. Perhaps the researcher had a late night and simply forgot to credit his or her source
appropriately.
▪ Conversely, a person who has a reputation for academic misconduct is more likely to be judged harshly for plagiarizing
because of his/her consistent past of unethical behavior. One weakness of virtue ethical theory is that it does not take
into consideration a person’s change in moral character.
▪ For example, a scientist who may have made mistakes in the past may honestly have the same late-night story as the
scientist in good standing. Neither of these scientists intentionally plagiarized, but the act was still committed. On the
other hand, a researcher may have a sudden change from moral to immoral character may go unnoticed until a
significant amount of evidence mounts up against him/her.
 5. Self-Realization Ethics
▪ Each of the preceding ethical theories leaves considerable room for self-interest, that is, for pursuing what is good for
oneself. Thus, utilitarianism says that self-interest should enter into our calculations of the overall good; rights ethics
says we have rights to pursue our legitimate interests; duty ethics says we have duties to ourselves; and virtue ethics
links our good with participating in communities and social practices.
▪ Self-realization ethics, however, gives greater prominence to self-interest and to personal commitments that individuals
develop in pursuing self-fulfillment.
▪ As with the other ethical theories, we will consider two versions, this time depending on how the self (the person) is
conceived.
▪ In a community-oriented version, the self to be realized is understood in terms of caring relationships and communities.
In a second version, called ethical egoism, the self is conceived in a highly individualistic manner.
▪ The community-oriented version of self realization ethics says that each individual ought to pursue self-realization, but it
emphasizes the importance of caring relationships and communities in understanding self-realization.
 5. Self-Realization Ethics
▪ It emphasizes that we are social beings whose identities and meanings are linked to the communities in which we
participate.
▪ This theme is expressed by F. H. Bradley (1826–1924): “The ‘individual’ apart from the community is an abstraction.
It is not anything real, and hence not anything that we can realize… I am myself by sharing with others.” Individuals
vary greatly in what they desire most strongly, and also in their talents and virtues.
▪ Self-realization ethics points to the highly personal commitments that motivate, guide, and give meaning to the
work of engineers and other professionals.
▪ These commitments enter into the core of an individual’s character. As such, they reflect what engineers care about
deeply in ways that evoke their interest and energy, shape their identities, and generate pride or shame in their
work.
▪ Personal commitments are commitments that are not incumbent on everyone—for example, specific humanitarian,
environmental, religious, political, aesthetic, supererogatory, and family commitments. They also include, however,
commitments to obligatory professional standards, especially when these are linked to an individual’s broader value
perspective.
 6. Ethical Egoism
▪ Ethical egoism is a more individualistic version of self-realization ethics that says each of us ought always and only to
promote our self-interest.
▪ The theory is ethical in that it is a theory about morality, and it is egoistic because it says the sole duty of each of us is to
maximize our well-being.
▪ Self-interest is understood as our long-term and enlightened well-being (good, happiness), rather than a narrow,
short-sighted pursuit of immediate pleasures that leaves us frustrated or damaged in the long run.
▪ Thus, Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) and Ayn Rand (1905–1982) recommended a “rational” concern for one’s long-term
interests.
▪ Nevertheless, ethical egoism sounds like an endorsement of selfishness. It implies that engineers should think first and
last about what is beneficial to themselves, an implication at odds with the injunction to keep paramount public health,
safety, and welfare. As such, ethical egoism is an alarming view.
 6. Ethical Egoism
▪ Are there any arguments to support ethical egoism? Rand offered three arguments.
▪ First, she emphasized the importance of self-respect and then portrayed altruism toward others as incompatible
with valuing oneself. She contended that acts of altruism are degrading, both to others and to oneself: “altruism
permits no concept of a self-respecting, self-supporting man—a man who supports his life by his effort and neither
sacrifices himself nor others.”
▪ This argument contains one true premise: Independence is a value of great importance, especially in democratic
and capitalistic economies. Yet, independence is not the only important value. In infancy, advanced age, and various
junctures in between, each of us is vulnerable.
▪ We are also interdependent, as much as independent. Self-respect includes recognition of our vulnerabilities and
interdependencies, and certainly, it is compatible with caring about other persons as well as about ourselves.
▪ Rand’s second argument was that the world would be a better place if all or most people embraced ethical egoism.