45

C t Ethi
DEBORAH G JOHNSON

C t t h l h id it fi t t thil d
ti I l i bi dd b f th f t t h l ?
Wht t f t t h l hld b d? Wh i ll ibl
f i ft h th ft i l tht idiidl h
fll d t d it d h th l d t t t h i f f t ? Will th
use of encryption technology make crime detection impossible? Will virtual reality
technology lead to a populace of individuals addicted to fantasy worlds? Can democ
k th l b l l f th I t t ? Th ti l d ltitl t
d l ti b t ht i df h bi h t ik th
tki t hi ht b f t h t bl libt d lit d
A thiit d ith th i i d b t t h l
ti h b t i l l tti A th t h i l i di
t t h l i ? S li t h t th i difft f th
ethical issues that a "new ethics" is required Others claim that the ethical issues
around computer technology are implicitly and at their core issues that have
arisen before and can for the most part at least be addressed with familiar moral
t d t h i
Th i i i i t t i d ith l th i t t d i t t
ti W h t i it b t t t h l d t b i l t t d
liht b l b t h t t thil i ? I fild f td ith it
d i d d t dd th t h i l i di t t h l
?I il thdl i d f li t t h i l i ? Whil
th i i t t i d th i i i t l If ld i d t i f
something unique about the issues surrounding computer technology it might
explain why computer technology unlike many other technologies gives rise to
ethical issues; it might provide the justification for the creation of a special field of
td d it i h t i l l i t th ti b t thdl
I h t fll I i t f iti t h t fll b t th li
tht t thil i i d th l i t h t t thil i
t i M ti dd i t t h i l i i h t I ill tht
t t h l id th instrumentation f h ti d t h b
k it ibl f h bi t d h t th ld t d b f dd i

608
 COMPUTER ETHICS

h t th ld d b f Wh flhd t thi t l
puter ethical issues to be new species of familiar ethical issues. The new species have
properties that ultimately change the meaning of ethical concepts and theories but
not so much as to justify the claim that entirely new ethical concepts or systems
h b td
Th d ti id th b k d f tki th ti f hth
t thil i i I th fit ti f i t h l i
l I t l h it bt i ith t h
l tj t t t h l I b t ti If l i l
t t h l

Technology Ethics and the Instrumentation of Human Action

It ill b h l f l t b i b ki b t th ti b t t h l d
thi H t h l b f iifi t t h i ? Th i l t
t Fit t h l ft k it ibl f h bi t d h t th
ld t d i t h t it t h i k f l b b tht b l i t t th h
race spaceships that take human beings to the moon and cloning Technology can
create new possibilities for collective and institutional arrangements as well as for
individual action Individually we can do what we could not do before traveling
t dit i i l i lib t i l f h ii
f t l t t i A ll iti d ti
l d t h l i l l d d t hil
ith f l d bl t d kid f d t
I dditi t ki it ibl f h bi t d h t th ld t d
i t h t it t h l ll h bi t d h t th ld d b f bt i
new ways We can engage in roughly the same activities traveling working
keeping records being entertained communicating making war and perform
roughly the same actiontypes buying something writing words supervising em
l ki llti tdi t l h H h
i th tiiti d t i t ith t h l i th tiiti d
t i t h difft ti ti t h t h th h t f th
tiit t i t C i d th t f iti ith i t h l i Wh
I it ith d il th il h I it i
t i t l d h I it i t l t i
l h fiti i i h i S th h i l t tht tk l
when I write are very different when I use different technologies
Consider now the differences in the actiontype "purchasing an item from a
store" when the purchase is made by paying cash as compared with paying by
dit d Nt l th h i l t tht d i f f t b t th ti h
difft ti Wh I ith dit d d i t t i l l
td d tht b ditd ith th d Of d
ld h b t d h I id ith h bt t il Th h i th
h i l f t f th t i t filitt d t i i t
f th t i t Bf dit d h h h th th

609
DEBORAH G JOHNSON

l ld i d i d could t d f th
transaction by writingup a paper receipt keeping one copy and giving another
to the buyer The buyer's name and address might or might not appear on the
receipt With creditcard technology while the buyer may or may not get a
i t th i ibilit f d t bi td R d
t t i l l d fftll d d d tht t i d t th b ' idtit
d il l t d ith th t t i b th h
A d i t t d l i th d f h t t i th l l could h kd
f th d dd f h t Th t could h kd
l t t h h l d d i d t i f th b i tt f idiidl
customers or figure out patterns with regard to where their customers resided and
how often and when they purchased what items However the amount of labor
involved was a disincentive to this (so much so that the idea probably never occurred
t t t ) Td d t i i t l k thi tiit ibl d
t h t it i ttil i d i t d h Th i t i tht t h l
h tiiti d t i t tht i t f th t i t
filittd d t i d
Th d i t i t i I ki h i i i l t th d i t i t i tht ti t h i t
make between acttypes and acttokens An acttype is a kind of action for example
reading a book walking and an acttoken is a particular instance of the acttype
An acttoken is an instance of the acttype performed by a particular person at a
til ti d l f l Sith d A Tale of Two Cities hil itti
i th d h i i hi h td M i t i tht h t h l i i l d i
th f f tt t f ttk b ibl It i
ibl f l t "l h " hil itti i f t f t
l d it t I t d f ll i t h d i i l i
k k b d lik " " O ' tit i th
t b h bi S h h bi f
acttype with technology a new set of tokens (of an acttype) becomes possible and
these acttokens have properties that are distinct from other tokens of the same act
type Later I will argue that our understanding of an acttype may change as a
t h l b d l
Th f i t t th i d t d i th ti bt t h l d
thi i t k l d th ti bt t h l d h ti
T h l t ibiliti f i d i i d l d llti h ti d
it h th ti f ttk Th h i ti fili
tt d/ t i i t f t i t d lt h
beings make different choices
To avoid misunderstanding it should be noted that this relationship between
technology and human action is seamless Technology provides the instrumentation
f h ti It i t h t tht t h l " i t " h
ti h bi i it h ( i i th th d i t i ) t tht
h bi " t k " t h l T h l id th
t f h ti h lik bdi d H bi tb i thi
bdi i ti d t h l ll t d d d i f f t thi
f th tht d ith bdi l It i i l l i t i t thik h

610
 COMPUTER ETHICS

b t th d i b l d Th b d i f th ll " d i b l d " i t t d
that differ from those who we call "ablebodied" The disabled often use technology
to get their bodies to do what the ablebodied can do without it for example to
move around produce audible sounds make marks on paper
T h l h th i t t t i fh ti t t f th di
b l d b t f th blbdid ll I d d t t h l t t
h ti i tht t i l t it fl ti
C i d hdl iibl f t k b d Wh th k b d i
td t t d th t i t d t th I t t d h
th i l f t t d l h t i th i l
finger movements can wreak havoc in the lives of thousands (even millions) of
people The technology has instrumented an action not possible without it To be
sure individuals could wreak havoc on the lives of others before computer technol
bt t i thi d h t it il
R i i th i t i t ti bt t h l d h ti
i i t t f t i th d f l t i f h ibilit i t h l
i t t d tiiti ill h thi H th h k
t id ibilit f l h i i d tht h i l d
his fingers while sitting in his home study Technology does nothing independent of
human initiative though of course sometimes human beings cannot foresee what
it is they are doing with technology This intimate connection between technology
d h ti i l i t t f d t d i th i i
t thi b t t h t ill b l lt
S th fit t i d t d i th ti b t t h l d thi
i t d t d th i t i t ti bt t h l d h ti
Th t t t t f h ti t thi Thi t t
bi t b th f ti i thi i b t h ti N t h l
th ti i th ki b t i thi d th f t t h t t h l
instruments human action have any moral significance? Does the instrumentation
of human action affect the character of ethical issues or the nature of ethical
decisionmaking?
G l l l h i l h h not liitl f d th i t t t i
fh ti Th t h d blbdid h d h i l
ld ith f i d t F th t t l h i l h h t t h h t
f t h l i ll i i f t (Th f ti t thi
bth h i t i l l d tl F l H J [1984] i d th
ti b t t h l dh ti d t f t tht
the powers of technology change human action to such an extent that a change in
ethics is called for) Yet airplanes guns bombs computers and a wide variety of
medical devices to mention some of the most powerful inventions have all changed
ht h bi d ith t f thi bdi d i til h
h d ht h bi d t d ith th I t l i i
t h t th l f t l f h i h h d l tht t h l h
h d th iti fh bi t t
Th i t t t i fh ti h l iifi f l
F i t th ibiliti f h ti td b t h l thil

611
DEBORAH G JOHNSON

ti tht h h f d bf Shld d l l
weapons and risk a nuclear war? Should I give my organs for transplantation? Is it
wrong to make a copy of software? Is there anything wrong with placing a cookie
on a computer when the computer is used to visit a web site? (A cookie is a
h i t h t ll b it t k t k f h i i th it
Th h i b d i t h t th k l d t f th iit)
Shld ll i t l l i t hih t b bilt? ( I t l l i t h i h hih
tht d h t b i l t dl h f t th t
bil d thi i f t i b t d t th f th t b i l )
S d h t h l h th ti f t i t k th l
character of the actiontype may change Thus computerized environments call
upon us to rethink and reevaluate our moral understanding of various activities
and actiontypes Yes generally it is morally acceptable for employers to keep track
f th k f l b t i it ll tbl f l t
ft t h t ll th l t d d l k t k
l k dt i l ' il b b i ? Wh I k t
d i t l fili bit Ihd t d t i thi t t t th fidti
lit f th d Wh I ith t t i d t I h t
consider what is required to ensure the same level of confidentiality While tele
phone surveys might have been morally neutral before they may not be now given
how easy it is to correlate the information obtained with other information about
idiidl
F i l l th f i l i t t i d t i i f t f t h l i t t d
tiiti d t i t tht i d i i d l d iti k diff
t hi f th th d bf Th f f t f th h d t b
l t d ll F l th I t t f i l i t t lbliti f th ld
Thi h th l l t i lli d bliti tht i d i i d l
t h l h i I th h f th d d it d i i i h h
wellbeing? Can democratic institutions exist on the scale made possible by the
Internet especially when they are less dependent on geographical space?
So technology and ethics are connected in so far as technology instruments
h ti d th i t t t i t thil ti tht h d
t i bf T h l l h th ti f tiiti d ti
t i tht i l idti f th tiiti d
t i t With thi d t d i f th ti bt t h l
d thi dd th ti tht h b tti
t thiit th t h i l i di t t h l i ?

The GenusSpecies Account

Th t tht I h j t i f th tibt t h l d thi
ffi tht t t h l thil ti b t it i t l
ith d t th i f t thil i New d unique
difft G l l th h d th i f t thil i d
td th at a certain level f l i f t thil i

612
 COMPUTER ETHICS

Th h d i k th b d i lll b t
puter ethical issues and other ethical issues i e ethical issues prior to or independ
ent of computers Issues of privacy property accountability and access have been
around they argue for centuries Familiar concepts and principles seem to be at the
f t thil i M t t h l i t th i t
t h l t hll thil ti Thik f h i t i l b t i
i d b th bliti f h t h i i t i hidd
d tl ti t t i S th f t t h t t t h l
t i i t l t h h f t t h
l i i i i S t h i iil b id b t
intellectual property issues Think of all the technologies that historically have
challenged Western notions of property for example electromagnetism audio and
video recording Consider also the complex issues of accountability that have arisen
d h d b i t h l i f l i t l ll
ti d th f f t ft l i i hild S th t i t th i
f t thil i h i tht fili l t
d t i t d t d th d t h t th t h l i h h l l d
l ti i th tht t t h l d (Thi th
position I took in my early work on computer ethics see Johnson 1985)
On the other hand those who believe that computer ethical issues are unique
have pointed to distinctive features of computer technology Computer technology
h b h t b t th ti f entities t h t i t d bf ft i
hi th I t t ki i t l lit id C t thil i
i if f th th t h t th d l ith titi t h t h b
d l t ith b f
M f th titi d ibl b f th l f i f t i
i if j t th l i f titi th i t
b d i t f l Th l f iti dt llti l l
tions and statistical analysis made possible by computer technology is unpreced
ented The increased scale of informationprocessing and statistical analysis has also
made possible new kinds of knowledge. We have been able to acquire information
b t th l t d th l b l tht ld h b ibl
itht t t h l Siill t t i t d i f t i t
ibl b f Y t th t f th i f t t h l
h h i d th t h l ' l l b i l i t it i h t libilit d t
d i (Jh 2001)
Th t h id f thi i t i h th O th
hand those who argue against the uniqueness of computer ethical issues focus on
what makes an issue an ethiccd issue; they focus on understanding and classifying
issues in moral terms On the other hand those who argue for uniqueness seem to
f f t f t technobgy. Th it t thi il b t
t t h l d th tht i th t h l i i th
thil i t b i Nti tht h t id l i d t tl
t d i t h t th th id l i
Ih d l h (Jh 1994 2001) t h t th t b k l
f t t h i li b t h id f thi i dIh d d t d i

613
DEBORAH G JOHNSON

f t thil i tht thi th t id I tht t

ethical issues should be understood as new species of familiar (generic) ethical
issues While this account captures something claimed on each side of the issue t
gives priority to the ethical character of computer ethical issues
I d l d thi tb tii ht h h thiit td
ith i t t i i l i t t h l I d t d t i h t h th
i thil i d h t it i t t t i d t t th t itti
ith f i l i itti d ith f l i l t i i l Thi ft
i l i b l F l h f t d ith f
t h k b k i it t t k h t h th b h i i th
ical Here we may make an analogy with breaking into someone's home and since
breaking into someone's home is unethical it seems that breaking into a computer
system is also unethical Of course this is just a starting place We may still want to
k h t h th l i it d h tl b k i it t
t i thil W ti b l i t th l fth d lifi
th b h i i fili lt Lik b k i it h b k i t
t t i l ilti f t d i S d t d b k i
it t t thil tt b ti th b h i t fili
moral concepts and principles This helps us understand the ethical nature of the act
Similarly in trying to understand whether the use of cookies to identify who has
visited a web site is morally problematic we may reason by analogy in order to
i d t i f th l t l t d i i l Th f ki i ht
lik th f hidd ill i bildi k Y
bi d d b t th / k i iiibl d t k
b h i i bi b d d d d Wh b it t l l t h t th
ki thi i l t ill i t h if l k
d th Of d h i l idtit
i tht ki d t
The process here involves using what we know about a familiar situation to
understand another less familiar situation and we do this by connecting the new
situation to a familiar moral concept or principle It seems that human beings
ld t b bl t i itti h i thil i l i t i l
th i t t i td i th t ht l d d t d t
b thil tt I i t f t ddl i Th
l k ht iil t h bi Th lk d t l k lik bt
i hil th b h i t th t thi f thi
h th k H ld t h i k b t thi b h i ? Of
response would be culturally shaped but the point is that we would not consider
the behavior unethical unless it had characteristics that connected to one of our
moral notions Nose touching while speaking would probably not connect
bt t h t th li b h d i tht ltd i h t h bi
th b h d i tht fit dfiiti f li th ld
t h i k f th b h i thil S h j d t ld i ll th i f
thil ltii b t th i t fi t h H th t t
i t i tht b h i di tb i d h i l iifi
l th tt l ti t h t l d h

614
 COMPUTER ETHICS

The outer space case may seem far-fetched but it is related to computer ethics n
the sense that computer technology gives human beings the capacity to do things
they could not do before What we can do today with computer technology is not
far from what human beings living a few centuries ago might have magined of
creatures from other planets We have x-ray vision; that is we can see detailed
images of internal organs We can sit in our offices with the door closed and watch
every movement of our employees in other rooms We can play games (in real time)
with people thousands of miles away Still whether the behavior of aliens or the
behavior of human beings behavior will not be recognized as ethical/unethical
unless it is connected to familiar moral concepts and principles - do no harm tell
the truth respect property and privacy
My claim is then that we cannot recognize an ethical issue as such unless we can
see something in the situation that connects to a familiar moral notion This is a meta-
ethical claim The genus-species account makes a claim about how we
identify classify and understand An implication of this claim is that technology
cannot suddenly thrust us into wholly unique moral territory though later I will
discuss how moral concepts and categories may significantly change (over time) due
to technology - recognizing new species over time changes our understanding of
the genus

Avoiding the Mistake of Unique Technology

I have already suggested the mistake made by those who emphasize the uniqueness
of the technology and then presume that since the technology is unique the ethical
issues around it must be unique The uniqueness of the technology is not in dispute
While computer technology has features in common with other technologies and
while it may be thought of as an extension of earlier calculating machines nothing
with the capabilities of modern computers has ever existed before Moreover it s
not in dispute that computer technology creates environments (for human action)
with properties that never existed before Never before have human beings had the
ability to pay for purchases via credit card to launch computer viruses to experi-
ence virtual reality and so on However the question of uniqueness of computer
ethical issues has to do with whether the ethical issues are unique not the technol-
ogy To answer the question about the uniqueness of the ethical issues we have to
look at the nature of the ethical issues - not the technology
Maner (1996) seems to make this mistake of emphasizing the uniqueness of the
technology While he provides a set of examples and while I believe all the
examples are flawed in the same way I will address only one example Maner
argues that because of the nature of computer technology we have an obligation
to provide computers for the disabled He claims that this is a unique ethical argu-
ment because never before has there been a machine with such general applicabil-
ity Hence never before could there have been an argument of this kind for making
computers available to the disabled According to Maner we have a unique obliga-
tion to provide computers for the disabled He writes

615
DEBORAH G JOHNSON
 COMPUTER ETHICS

dli ith f i l i i f tht d th " l " th t d

principles to the new species the computer ethical issue At first glance this may
seem to fit what lawyers and judges have done in the case of computer software
When first confronted with ownership issues around computer software they classi
fid ft ttil f f i t l l t l t d th tid t
t dititi d i i l f iht d t t l
Th bl ith thi i t fh t thil i hld b
d d d i i th ti f" l i t i " Aliti t d t i d
l t h i l ti W tk d t d i i l d l it t
(fid d d t d ) Thi i t h ht h ith
computer ethical issues The process of connecting moral concepts and principles to
situations involving computer technology is synthetic and indeterminate Often he
moral concepts and principles are ambiguous in their application to a new technol
d ft th t h l i till "i th k i " (Ckb dO d 1993)
M (1985) d th flid t f th i t t i l h h d
tht h f th k f t thi i l l i th t l
ddl C t l ddl t i l liti f fili t d
i i l I d d th it f l d jd li dititi
and principles from copyright and patent law to software is somewhat misleading
The picture hides the fact that the process is one of defining the technology In the
very early days of computing it was not clear what software was let alone whether
it th i Y th thi lld tht ld b
d i l ll h d b t it t l f l l
l ti h t th Jd dl ki

• I th i f id?
• I f h i th i t l t t f t?
• Is a program a series of "mental steps" capable in principle of being thought
through by a human?

Th i t f iht d t t l t t t fit th k
t th k Thiki f thi " l i " i i l t i ildi
b th did t k h t "th "
Fili t d i i l fl i h itti b t th t
" l i d " Fili t d i i l dt t d t d i f
th i t t i / R b t h t th d t i d iht t
th ti f hth t i f id tl
steps or design specifications for machines Lawyers judges and policymakers
were deciding what computer programs were to become The decisions about how
to connect computer programs to copyright and patent law in a sense made com
t ft h t it i I d d h t it i h t it i d t d t b i till
bi t i t d i th t td Th i tl d i b d
t i t i fit b t th t h l dl l d l i i l ( thti
) th liti
S hil th i t f t thil i l d itlf t
i i t thil i i f l i d thi th t hld t

617
DEBORAH G JOHNSON

b i t t d i thi Th fd i fili l t d
principles to understand and address computer ethical issues is synthetic
One final caution must be made regarding the genusspecies account of computer
ethical issues The account emphasizes the process by which ethical issues are
idtifd d lifid d idtifti d lifiti tii
O ti i d d d th i f h
O d t d i f l t d i i l ti h
th t d t d itti Pi i d l h ht i t
b i h h d d ti t h i t t h l i
d h t th k ibl Thi b f l i th ti f "if
mation privacy" a relatively new form of privacy tied to computer technology
Something similar could be said about property The notion of property has
changed over time with the invention of a variety of things A current example
h i diitlid i dh it i f i jd l d thiit t thik
f t i
Thi t h t hil th i t d i tht t thil
i f d t l l i it ll f f d t l h i thi
ti f d t l h i t d i i l Th t li h
such changes come about slowly and gradually Human beings cannot recognize
situations as ethical unless they connect in some way to familiar moral concepts
and principles

C l i

A th t h i l i di t t h l i ? C t thil
i i f i l bl Ethil i l b t
human beings and human action Computer technology like other technologies
changes the instrumentation of human action and in so doing makes it possible for
human beings to do what they could not do before as well as to do in new ways
h t th did b f Th h tht h bi f thil ti
th f d bf b t th ti d t tk it ttl i
l t i t W d t d th itti b d i fili l
t d i i l W k th t h l d th t h i l i i t thi
d t d

A k l d t

This chapter was developed from chapter 1 "What is Computer Ethics?" of my

Computer Ethics, 3rd edn (Upper Saddle River NJ: PrenticeHall 2001)

References

Ckb C d O d S (1993) Gender and Technology in the Making. L d S

Jh D G (1985) Computer Ethics. U Sddl Ri NJ P t i H l l

618
 COMPUTER ETHICS

(1994) Computer Ethics, 2nd edn Upper Saddle River NJ: Prentice-Hall
(2001) Computer Ethics, 3rd edn Upper Saddle River NJ: Prentice-Hall
Jonas H (1984) The Imperative of Responsibility. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Maner W (1996) Unique ethical problems in information technology Science and Engineering
Ethics 2 (2): 137-54
Moor J (1985) What is computer ethics? Metaphilosophy, 16 (4): 266-75

Further reading
Baird R M Ramsower R and Rosenbaum S E (eds) (2000) Cyberethics. Amherst NY:
Prometheus
Hester D M and Ford P J (eds) (2001) Computers and Ethics in the Cyberage. Upper Saddle
River NJ: Prentice-Hall
Johnson D G and Nissenbaum H (eds) (1995) Computers, Ethics, and Social Values. Engle-
wood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall
Tavani H (1996) Bibliography: a computer ethics bibliography Computers and Society.

619