An "A" paper will answer each exam essay question fully, utilizing both the text AND outside
reviewed work. This is a senior level course, and I expect the highest quality presentation of
your work as well. It is expected that no question will be
ered in more than
answer should be less than
pages in length. Poor presentation and improper format will
significantly impact your score.
It is expected that for each question, you will provide a
minimum of three
I have specific expectations in the course for you to read and synthesize ethical research, as you
prepare to graduate. Remember, you are only looking to discuss the question in
6 pages. A
good rule of thumb is to have at least one source per page tha
t you need to fill
, if you have less
your grade will be impacted
. I would expect to see
, for an “A” paper, (in addition to
Tavani's text) for each of the
You should r
etrieve sources relevant to your topic
from journals of an ac
as opposed to USA Today, Newsweek, or Wikipedia
which are not scholarly in nature.
You are not writing a dissertation, only a clean, well thought
out discourse about the questions you select. You are permitted to use the sources in Tavani
however, I would expect to see at least one (preferably more) original sources per question.
Extra consideration will be given, should you decide to answer one of the questions from
12, as we did not discuss these chapters in the disc
ussion forum. Do not select more
than one question from this group of chapters, however.
All exam papers should include:
Title page (set out per APA guidelines).
one for each of the essays
you select to answer from the
Each question should start at the top of its own page.
reference page should
also be present, in APA format, at the end of the document.
Other general information:
space your work.
Same font and file conventions appl
y, as they have all semester.
do not write out the entire question
in your section header
, the chapter and a few word title will
be free of grammatical and spelling errors.
of the following questions to answer
Each question answered
should be clearly delineated in its own section. If you choose to list the verbiage of the question,
this does not count toward you pagination requirement for discussion of the answer. Be sure that
you clearly de
fine what question you are answering, do not simply write three sections and not
label what they are in response to.
Chapter 1. Much has been written about the benefits and risks of participating in social
networking services (SNSs) such as Facebook and M
ySpace, and we briefly described
some controversies associated with these forums. To date, we do not have clear and
coherent policies governing one’s participation in these forums; nor do we have clear and
explicit policies regarding which kinds of persona
l information from these forums should
be accessible to third parties. So, it would seem that these forums can easily generate
what James Moor calls “policy vacuums.” Moor believes that before we can fill these
vacuums with successful policies, we must fir
st identify and resolve any conceptual
muddles that arise. How many kinds of conceptual muddles can you identify with respect
to the SNSs in which you, or those you know, participate?
Chapter 2. Imagine a scenario in which the United States government, w
ith the approval
of the majority of Americans, decides to round up all Arab
Americans and relocate them
to internment camps. Also, imagine that you have a friend who is an American citizen of
Arab descent. She asks you to protect her from the authorities.
You have known this
person all of you life, and you are convinced that she is a loyal American. So you agree to
hide her in the third floor of your house. Next, imagine that a United States federal agent
knocks on your door and asks if you know the whereab
outs of the person that you are
hiding. How would you respond to that agent? You now face a genuine moral dilemma
because you cannot both keep your promise to your friend and tell the truth to the federal
agent. Initially, your gut reaction might suggest t
hat the solution to your dilemma is quite
simple. For example, you might believe that a far greater good will be served by lying to
the federal agent than by breaking your promise to your friend. However, to embrace the
moral principle inherent in that lin
e of reasoning is to fall back into utilitarianism. And
we have already seen some of the difficulties that can result from trying to be a consistent
and thoroughgoing utilitarian. Furthermore, could you consistently universalize a moral
principle that stat
es whenever you must choose between telling the truth to authorities
and breaking a promise to a friend always honor your promise? Will that principle work
in every case? Will Ross’s theory help in this situation? Explain. What if the Arab
ent camp was instead for a religious minority in the United States.
Would your position change then? Explain.
Chapter 3. Based on what you learned in Chapter 3, construct an argument to support or
refute the view that all undergraduate students should b
e required to take a course in
cyberethics. Apply the seven
step strategy (for distinguishing between arguments that are
valid, inductive, and fallacious) to your argument. Be sure to explain your position and
argument thoroughly, you may utilize outside s
ources to enhance your argument as well.
Chapter 4. Do you believe that a coherent and comprehensive code of conduct for
computing and IT professionals is possible? If so, which of the codes mentioned in
Chapter 4 best approximates such a code? In framing
your response to this question,
consult the full descriptions of the five professional codes included in Appendixes A
through E at:
Chapter 5. In the days and weeks immediately following the tragic events of September
11, 2001, some political leaders claimed that extrao
rdinary times call for extraordinary
measures; in times of war, basic civil liberties and freedoms, such as privacy, need to be
severely restricted for the sake of national security and safety. Perhaps, as a nation, the
value that we have traditionally att
ached to privacy has diminished significantly since
then. Initially, American citizens strongly supported the Patriot Act, which passed by an
overwhelming margin in both houses of Congress and was enacted into law on October
21, 2001. However, between 2001
and 2005 support for this act diminished considerably.
Many privacy advocates believe that it goes too far and thus erodes basic civil liberties.
Some critics also fear that certain provisions included in the act could easily be abused.
Examine some of th
e details of the Patriot Act (which can be viewed on the Web), and
determine whether its measures are as extreme as its critics suggest. Are those measures
consistent with the value of privacy, which Americans claim to embrace? Do privacy
interests need to
be reassessed, and possibly recalibrated, in light of ongoing threats from
Chapter 6. In section 6.3.1, we examined some issues surrounding a “hacker code of
ethics.” We also saw why this code containing the six principles described by Steve
Levy, has been controversial. Is it possible to establish an appropriate set of guidelines
for a hacker code of ethics, i.e., for non
malicious hackers, without becoming a moral
relativist? You may want to revisit our discussion of moral relativism in Ch
apter 2 in
deciding your answer to this question.
Assess arguments for and against the use of biometric technologies for
security, especially in airports and large stadiums. Should biometric technologies such as
recognition programs and ir
is scanners be used in public places to catch criminals?
In the post
September 11 world, there is much more support for these technologies than
there was when biometrics were used at Super Bowl XXXV in January 2001. Granted
that such technologies can help
the government to catch criminals and suspected
terrorists, what kinds of issues do they raise from a civil liberties perspective? Compare
the arguments for and against the use of biometric technologies in tracking down
criminals to arguments we examined f
or and against computerized record matching in our
discussion of privacy in Chapter 5. Do you support the use of biometrics in large, public
gathering places? Defend your answer.
In Chapter 5 we saw that privacy advocates argue for greater
personal information by individuals
, while many in the commercial sector argue for
increased access to that information. In this chapter, we saw that those positions have
entrepreneurs argue for control of the flow of informati
on on the
Internet, while ordinary users argue for access to that information. Is there an irony,
perhaps even an inconsistency, here? Can this inconsistency be resolved in a logically
coherent manner? How? Explain.
Examine Richard Spinello’s
argument for why ISPs can, in certain instances,
be held morally accountable for defamatory remarks made in their forums even if they
are immune from legal liability (under the “Good Samaritan” provision of the CDA).
How might Spinello’s argument be extend
ed to include other kinds of harm (i.e., in
addition to defamation) that occur in ISPs? For example, consider the Amy Boyer case of
cyberstalking that we briefly described in Chapter 1. Could the two ISPs involved, Tripod
and Geocities, be morally accounta
ble for what happened to Boyer, using Spinellos’s
model? Can that model also help us to analyze moral accountability for cyberbullying
incidents that have occurred on social networking services such as MySpace or
noted that some controversies associated with workplace
monitoring now have global and international implications. For example, Stephen
Coleman points out that in the global workforce, an employee’s privacy could be violated
by software monitoring programs
that reside on a computer located in a country different
from where that employee works. Do we need new kinds of international agreements and
policies for employee monitoring, as Coleman suggests? And do we need to adopt an
“International Bill of Human Ri
ghts,” as Coleman also suggests, in response to global
challenges posed by workplace monitoring? If not, what kinds of alternative proposals
might be suitable?
Consider again the incident of cyberbullying on MySpace that we examined
on 11.1.3, which resulted in Megan Meier’s suicide in 2006. To what extent can
social networking sites control cyberbullying and other forms of harassment that occur in
their forums? In the case of MySpace, would a more explicit policy about the rules
ired to get a legitimate account on that SNS have prevented Lori Drew, the woman
who harassed Meier under the alias Josh Evans, from succeeding in bullying Meier
online? What implications does the Meier incident have for trust in cyberspace,
young teenagers who participate in social networking services?
Chapter 12. According to Bert Gordijn, what are some of the optimistic visions involving
nanotechnology? What are some of the pessimistic predictions involving nanotechnology
that Gordijn de
scribes? Identify and briefly describe the three nanoethics issues examined
by James Moor and John Wevkert. Why do some critics, such as Bill Joy, question
whether we should continue nanotechnology research? What is the Precautionary
Principle, as applied
scientific research? Can it be successfully applied to concerns
involving research in nanotechnology? Why does John Weckert believe that we should
“presume in favor of freedom” in scientific research?