All attached
Assessment item 3 back to top Applying Ethical Theory Value: 20% Due Date: 15-Sep-2018 Return Date: 09-Oct-2018 Length: 1500 Submission method options: Alternative submission method Task back to top Write an essay according to the following instructions. Your lecturer will provide few links for relevant articles and/or case studies. These will be available to you just after your second assignment submission date. · Choose one of the media articles or case studies listed by the lecturer in your Interact 2 subject site. Use the title of the article/case study provided in interact 2 as the title of your essay, so that the lecturer knows which article you are analysing: 1. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/internet-ethics/resources/students-and-sensors-data-education-privacy-and-research/ 2. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/internet-ethics/resources/ai-death-and-mourning/ 3. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/internet-ethics/resources/chinas-social-credit-score/ 4. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/internet-ethics/resources/targeting-a-broken-heart/ 5. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/internet-ethics/resources/data-collection-harvesting-personalities-online/ · Undertake further research about your chosen case, to assist you in analysing and discussing it in your essay. Analyse the article/case study from the perspective of four classical ethical theories including utilitarianism, deontology, contract, and virtue. Your essay should present well-reasoned arguments for your assessments and recommendations. 1. Utilitarian theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a739VjqdSI 2. Deontological theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bIys6JoEDw 3. Virtue theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ 4. Contract theory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Co6pNvd9mc · Write an overall conclusion that justifies your recommendations made in your essay. · Include a Reference list at the end of your work, in the correct APA referencing style, corresponding to in-text citations. The word limit for the essay is 1400-1500 words. Headings, citations and references do not count towards the word limit, but quotations do. NOTE: Please use the template provided in the resources section of this subject site. Rationale back to top This assessment task will assess the following learning outcome/s: · be able to identify ethical issues related to ICT. · be able to assess the implications of ethical problems. · be able to critically evaluate solutions to ethical problems. · be able to apply ethical theories to ethical problems. · be able to argue consistently and rationally about the moral issues raised by the adoption and use of ICT. · be able to analyse ethical situations using critical thinking techniques. This assessment extends the skills practised in Assessment item 1 and 2, to help you to achieve all the learning objectives. In addition to identifying a contentious situation in ICT and dissecting the argument(s) about it, you must also now demonstrate the ability to evaluate the elements of the argument by introducing classical ethical principles where appropriate. Since Assessment item 1 and 2, your knowledge will have grown, and you will now realise that almost all ICT ethical dilemmas can be classified under one of the main ICT ethical issues that are discussed in this subject; for instance, surveillance is a sub-issue of privacy, harmful software is a sub-issue of ICT professionalism, and piracy is a sub-issue of intellectual property. In ICT, the main ethical issues are taken to be: · ICT professionalism · Privacy · Security · Cyber-crime · Intellectual property · Regulation on the internet · Social inclusion · Community and identity · Pervasive and convergent computing. The assessment item is designed to help you to build skills towards achieving the learning objectives, by requiring you to: · identify an ICT-related ethical issue from a media article or case study; · apply classical ethical theory to the analysis of an ethically questionable situation to determine the rightness or wrongness of actions/decisions made therein; · derive logical and justifiable conclusions to resolve the ethical issue(s); and, · apply proper academic referencing. Marking criteria and standards back to top The following marking sheet will be used to assess students' submissions. Please check that you have met all the criteria before you submit your assignment. Criteria Standards High Distinction (HD) Distinction (DI) Credit (CR) Pass (PS) Fail (FL) Classical Ethical Theory (Value 60%) Demonstrates an excellent ability at applying ethical theories to the ethical issues. Demonstrates a good ability at applying ethical theories to the ethical issues. Makes a genuine attempt at applying the ethical theories to the ethical issues. The ethical theories do not link well with the ethical issues. The ethical theories are not properly applied to the ethical issues. Writing & structure (Value 20%) Language features and structures are used to convey meaning effectively, concisely, unambiguously, and in a tone appropriate to the audience and purpose with no spelling, grammatical, or punctuation errors. Well developed skills in expression & presentation of ideas. Fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type. Grammar & spelling accurate. Good skills in expression & clear presentation of ideas. Mostly fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type. Grammar & spelling contains a few minor errors. The text contains frequent errors in spelling, grammar, word choice, and structure, lacks clarity, and is not concise, but the meaning is apparent to the reader with some effort. Rudimentary skills in expression & presentation of ideas. Not all material is relevant &/or is presented in a disorganised manner. Meaning apparent, but writing style not fluent or well organised. Grammar & spelling contains many errors. Conclusion (Value 10%) Superior conclusion that ties the results of the analysis together into a coherent, logically valid & convincing argument. Very high standard conclusion that ties the results of the analysis together into a coherent, logically valid & convincing argument. High standard conclusion that ties the results of the analysis together into a coherent, logically valid & convincing argument. Rudimentary conclusion that provides a convincing argument. Sub-standard (or no) conclusion. Referencing (Value 10%) Referencing is comprehensive, demonstrates academic integrity, and conforms exactly to APA style conventions. Very good referencing, including reference list and citations. Evidence of high quality references. Good referencing, including reference list and citations. Evidence of good quality references. Referencing is comprehensive, mostly accurate according to APA style conventions, and demonstrates academic integrity. Some minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, etc) don’t impact on the transparency and traceability of the source, or demonstration of academic integrity. Sub-standard (or no) referencing. Poor quality (or no) references. Microsoft Word - Sample Assignment_SharpCassandra Cassandra Sharp 11334066 Page 1 SCHOOL OF COMPUTING AND MATHS, CHARLES STURT UNIVERSITY Britain's The Grand Tour piracy spree highlights the futility of blocking The Pirate Bay Assignment 3: Applying Ethical Theory Cassandra Sharp 11334066 Word Count: 1321 Cassandra Sharp 11334066 Page 2 NOTE: Introduction is absent in this sample, but you can write short paragraph to introduce the case study. Utilitarianism Perspective According to the Utilitarian theory, an act is good if it benefits the maximum number of people (Kizza, 2014). From a utilitarian perspective, downloading or streaming TV shows, although a breach of copyright, could be viewed as morally permissible because the greatest number of people have gotten happiness. The promotion of happiness is fundamental to the Utilitarian perspective (Tavani, 2013. p.54). Utilitarianism struggles to paint copyright infringement as wrongful and looks to favour less copyright rather than more, and might even go as far as condoning copyright infringement (Hawthorn, 2012) as the majority of people achieve happiness from doing so, therefore they would not support the blocking of websites like the Pirate Bay. However, just because something makes the majority of people happy, does not make it morally permissible, and morality should be judged not simply on whether it makes the majority of people happy. If you would not steal a movie from a store, why is it permissible to steal a movie online? The software industry faces billions of dollars in lost sales each year due to piracy and copyright infringement (Freeman & Peace, 2005). A utilitarian should also look at the benefit beyond the immediate consequence. Yes, breaching copyright to download and watch TV shows or movies would benefit the maximum number of people at present, the consequences in future could be less desirable (the excessive revenue lost each year means the industry will suffer), and therefore a utilitarian would have to consider that the best act might be to support the industry by blocking the websites that provide the content illegally. Deontology Perspective For a deontologist, an action is right or wrong in itself (Forester & Morrison, 2001) and pirating or streaming a TV show would always be immoral as a deontologist follows the same rules as everyone else – breaching copyright laws is illegal. If we ‘make exceptions for ourselves, we violate the principle of impartiality’ (Tavani, 2013), which is one of the main principles of the deontological ethical theory. Ross (in Tavani, 2013. p.59) believes we have a prima facie duties, which we must follow, such as honesty, benevolence, justice. A deontologist would always find piracy morally corrupt as it goes against these prima facie duties, and would support the blocking of websites to help curb piracy. However, even though it seems that, from a deontological perspective, it is always wrong to take someone’s rightful property without prior consent, no matter whether it does them good in the end or not, what happens when we turn the tables on the copyright holders? Many of today’s copyright monopoly run afoul, treating the general public and consumers as means rather than ends (Hawthorn, 2012). Following that, everyone should have access to same content regardless of their economic status, and everyone should be treated fairly and not discriminated against because they have less money so you are not doing anything morally Cassandra Sharp 11334066 Page 3 wrong by sharing or viewing content, as access for everyone is the fairest action. Blocking websites does nothing to improve access to digital content and only forces people to look elsewhere for the content they are after. Virtue Perspective This ethical theory focuses on the belief that a disposition to do the right thing is more effective than following a set of principles and rules, and that people should perform moral acts out of habit, not introspection (Reynolds, 2015). As a virtue ethicist, you could argue that piracy of TV shows is acceptable as it isn’t really hurting anyone, it is only for your own personal enjoyment, so you have deemed it morally permissible. Another virtue ethicist however, may take a different view. They may believe that stealing and piracy are one in the same, and therefore not morally permissible under any circumstances. Both can be considered moral people, but have differing perspectives. Each could then argue for or against the blocking of websites to prevent piracy using these same arguments. A major problem with the virtue theory is the difficulty of establishing the nature of the virtues,