DISCUSSION OUTLINE EVERTHING IN THE OUTLINE BELOW IS EXPECTED IN YOUR TEAM DISCUSSION RESULTS 1. INTROPARAGRAPH(copy/paste,fillintheblanks,thendeleteunderlines) This paper will examine the case of NAME OF ORGANIZATION & or INDIVIDUALS and NATURE OF INCIDENT OR ACTION OR NEGLECT. It will be shown that this INCIDENT OR ACTION OR NEGLECT violates [or demonstrates] the ethics of STATE THE ETHICAL PRINCIPLE OR THEORY YOU WILL ARGUE FOR . First, details of the case will be described. Then a precise definition of the ethical theory will be given. Next it will be shown how the details of this case relate to the ethical theory being discussed. Finally, suggestions will be made for future guidelines such that this ethical principle may be applied in this case or in similar cases. 2. CASEDETAILS • • • • • Chronology of events of case Principal people involved Those most responsible Results Those affected by results 3. ARGUMENT Connect terms of ethics definition to details of case events and/or results Use ARGUMENT OUTLINE for theory you have chosen. THE ARGUMENT SECTION The ARGUMENT is the work. 2 to 3 people could be assigned to the ARGUMENT. A good case analysis is one that can convince others. But if you never see the other side, if you only see your side of the issue, you will never be convincing, you will just sound belligerent. That is the whole point to this class. To get you to have a strong ethical voice when you might need it. A voice that can make people listen. But nobody listens when you show only one side. They think you do not understand their side, so they shut you out. The more you show that you have weighed all the sides, the more convincing you will be. Some of the theories have both sides built into the framing of the argument. For example, Rights Theory will discuss rights of all parties involved, never merely rights violations committed by one party against another. Utilitarianism Theory will discuss benefit and harm to all parties, this means all sides are thus examined. Justice Theory, however, does not do this and so for Justice Theory you must present an argument and a counterargument. 4. POLICIES/PROCEDURES • • How could events have been avoided? Future conduct/guidelines for any company/organization 5. NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT WOULD FIX THE PROBLEM(TECHFIX) • Do not summarize the case or theory CRITERIA FOR CASE ANALYSES Apply theory that best fits Stick with one action as your final action to be judged Describe connection of facts to theory in as much detail as your can Argument should be at least one page long. Correct use of language of ethical theory Correct use of language of ethical theory 1. Do not use language of another theory 2. Never mention rights when using any theories except Rights, Justice, and Rawls Never mention fairness except when doing Justice or Rawls Never mention better off or worse off unless doing Utilitarianism or Rawls Never mention results of an action when doing Kant HOW TO ANALYZE CASES ETHICAL THEORIES RIGHTS UTILITARIANISM KANT JUSTICE RAWLS VIRTUES CARING CASES Describe the case ARGUMENT Choose a theory to fit the case Tie the theory to description of the case In sentences of your argument you should connect WORDS of your case description to WORDS of the theory definition. HOW TO CONNECT (or bridge gaps between) WORDS OF YOUR CASE DESCRIPTION TO WORDS OF THE THEORY DEFINITION. Like algebra: (A + C) & (x + D) = (B+C) & (A +D) So solving for x? Analogy is, in connecting terms, make sure you fill in missing connections, like x. EXAMPLE of filling in the obvious Mary worked for Enron for 20 years. Therefore Mary is unethical! BRIDGE: If someone worked for Enron for 20 years they are unethical Notice that once you fill in the gaps of your reasoning, your thinking really becomes clear. In the example above, it might seem to make sense to conclude that since Mary worked at Enron, she might be unethical, but when you spell it out, the flaw in your thinking becomes clearer. The bridge is maintaining that everyone who worked for Enron was unethical, but of course, this is very unlikely. Just because Mary worked for Enron for 20 years doesn’t mean she was a crook. In fact, regular Enron workers were some of the victims of Enron execs who suffered most. They lost their pensions and everything, and then had trouble finding work elsewhere. IMPORTANT: In writing your argument, do not begin the argument with a summary of your case. Rather make your ethical statements, and bring in CASE DETAILS (facts) to demonstrate the ethical statements. you CHOOSE ONE FACT WHEN YOU DO YOUR CASE, THE MOST COMPUTER ETHICS IMPORTANT FACT. Below I give you examples of a case with 3 facts and how you would do an argument for each, but you would not be doing 3 arguments for a case, only one. RIGHTS ANALYSIS EXAMPLES (choosing action) EXAMPLE ONE Ethics of rights are violated in the case of Risking a Life to Protect a Child. FACTS Hahn burglarized the home of Aitken Aitken molested a child & photographed it Hahn stole disc with those photos & then delivered stolen photographs disc to police THEORY DEFINED RIGHTS a justified claim to a certain kind of treatment from others, to help from others or to be left alone by others. ARGUMENT FACT 1 Hahn burglarized the home of Aitken This burglary violated the negative right of Aitken to be left alone. CONNECTION: when you burglarize the home of someone you are not leaving them alone, you are violating their right to privacy in their own home. EXAMPLE TWO. PLEASE NOTE, this action would be a very bad choice to analyze. Why? Because it is a clear no-brainer. Obviously, Aitken was wrong to molest a child. You should choose an action that is not so clearcut. Ethics of rights are violated in the case of Risking a Life to Protect a Child. FACTS Hahn burglarized the home of Aitken Aitken molested a child & photographed it Hahn stole disc with those photos & then delivered stolen photographs disc to police THEORY DEFINED RIGHTS a justified claim to a certain kind of treatment from others, to help from others or to be left alone by others. ARGUMENT FACT 2 Aitken molested a child & photographed it. Molesting a child violates that negative right of the child to be left alone CONNECTION: When you touch a child sexually, you are not leaving them alone, you are violating their right to sexual choices, because children cannot make these choices, any interference is a violation of their choice EXAMPLE THREE. This would be the best choice of action for this case. Notice that in this case ethical rights seem to conflict. Ethics of rights are violated in the case of Risking a Life to Protect a Child. FACTS Hahn burglarized the home of Aitken Aitken molested a child & photographed it Hahn stole disc with those photos & then delivered stolen photographs disc to police THEORY DEFINED RIGHTS a justified claim to a certain kind of treatment from others, to help from others or to be left alone by others. ARGUMENT FACT 3 Hahn delivered stolen photographs disc to police This delivery violated negative right to privacy of Aitken if Aiken is innocent, but upheld the positive right of the child to help from others. CONNECTION: Delivering stolen discs to police is a violation of the negative right of innocent people. But the right of the child to sexual sanctity is important. iken had no right to privacy. He was not innocent. When Hahn initially burglaried Aiken’s home, Hahn did not know that Aiken was not innocent. He should not have burglarized a home, but once he discovered the discs, Aiken’s rights to privacy were forfeit. The right of the child to be left alone sexually is so important that it becomes a positive right. We must help her by making sure that she is not molested. She has a positive right to help from government and it is our duty to help if we can. Hahn, in delivering the disc to police was doing his ethical duty to help her, and it is now the duty of police to help even further. The connections in the examples I have given here are very short, you would elaborate, describing in detail as many conflicting rights as you can uncover, & you would clearly show which right is most important, & why. Make your reader feel what this is like, describe why the right matters. CAUTIONS: RIGHTS Theory • Privacy is always a negative right • Negative rights are usually more important than positive rights • Profit is not relevant to rights: do not mention profit CAUTIONS: UTILITARIANISM Theory • Innocence & Guilt are not relevant to Utilitarianism • It’s not just about sheer numbers—degree matters • Society is not a person—only people count • Do not mention pleasure/pain • Do not even think in terms of rights • Company losses rarely matter: o Money only counts when it goes from rich to poor  Rich get very little satisfaction or benefit from $1000., poor get great benefit from $1000.  Company x loses $$, Company y gains those $$, money just changes hands
Purchase answer to see full attachment