|
Information
technology has many advantages that can be used for the
promotion of ethical competence. It saves time and space, it
has an enormous memory storage capacity, it can process and
reorganize information fast and reliably, etc. Recent
technical developments in particular, which give us the
possibility to construct advanced games and simulate the
complexity of reality in micro-worlds, may further broaden
the spectrum of opportunities and possibilities for support
in ethical problem solving and decision making. In this paper
our efforts to construct an ethical problem-solving support
system and an ethical microworld are presented.
There are, however,
certain important issues to consider before building such
systems. The confounding of moral values with psychological
processes can create many problems and sometimes makes it
impossible (Blasi, 1980; Greene et al., 2004;
Haidt, 2001; Jackson, 1994;
Jaffee & Hyde, 2000).
Accordingly, our theoretical basis is that successful
information technology tools in ethics are those that are
adapted exclusively on psychological problem-solving and
decision-making processes.
When we are planning
to use information technology tools to support ethical
decision making we usually run the risk of disregarding the
psychological skill aspects of ethical competence. The
classical approach focuses normally on informing about moral
philosophy, presenting lists of principles and stakeholder
interests, or simply producing moral solutions based on
predefined normative values (Collins & Miller, 1992;
Gotterbarn & Rogerson, 2002; Pfeiffer, 1999). Creating and
using information technology tools based primarily on this
classical approach certainly has its strengths, but it also
has many weaknesses (Winograd, 1995; Friedman, 2005).Ethical
competence can be defined as based on the psychological
ability described as autonomy. However, this skill is not so
easy to use in real situations. Psychological research has
shown that plenty of time and certain conditions are demanded
before people can acquire and use the ethical ability of
autonomy (Piaget, 1932; Kohlberg, 1985; Schwartz, 2000;
Sunstein, 2005). When people face a moral problem they have
great difficulties not confusing moral goals, values,
feelings and emotions with the decision-making and
problem-solving processes and the methods adopted for the
solution of the problem. Usually, they do not clearly see the
context of the problem nor do they analyze it in the same way
they often do with problems of nature. In psychological
theory this is described as the moral phase of heteronomy,
which in contrast to autonomy, means that the individual does
not use functional problem-solving strategies, that is,
critical thinking. Autonomous and critical moral thinking is
difficult, more difficult than autonomous technical thinking.
In the searching to promote ethical competence we need to be
assured that the autonomous ethical thinking is indeed
stimulated by the support tools we use. Using
information technology to support the acquisition and use of
ethical autonomy is due to the special qualities and
possibilities of this technology.
The use of real life simulations by decision makers may help
them to learn easier how to handle morally complex and
controversial situations satisfactorily. One way to do this
is by connecting the progress of the simulation to the
concrete way users treat moral problems rather than to
general normative aspects of given solutions. For example,
this can be done by incorporating in the simulation the
interests, values, feelings, etc, of stakeholders whose
reaction may influence the development of the simulation
process.
Furthermore information technology tools have great
advantages according to the hypothesis of autonomy. Their
memory storage capacity is enormous. They are excellent in
doing systematic work and analysis of data. Just by using
them as a data base or an expert system in the effort to
solve a concrete moral problem, the user can get information
about certain values and interests, as well as about
alternative ways of action, that otherwise might be
overlooked. Reminiscence of the diversity, variety and
complexity of the actual moral problem could effectively
block decision makers’ natural tendency toward heteronomy,
and stimulate autonomy.
The paper presents the structure and function of an ethical
microworld simulation and of a support system in ethical
problem-solving and decision-making. The ethical microworld
simulation models realistic scenarios with interacting
independent stakeholders. Users of the simulation are
triggered to make autonomous decisions in dilemmas arising in
the interaction between stakeholders. The goals are to
investigate the possible approaches to implement the
psychological approach to ethical problem-solving and
decision-making, and to stimulate higher ethical competence.
The ethical support system is based on the theory of
autonomy. By using it thinking is guided away from heteronomy
and toward autonomy. Its basic features are: 1) not allow the
user to use the system as a moral authority. 2) not present a
ready made set of moral principles and values. 3) help the
user to be unconstrained by moral fixations and authorities,
4) help the user to organize and analyze the facts, 5) help
the user to weight the relevant values and principles against
each other, 6) help the user to solve the moral problem at
hand systematically, 7) force the user to motivate his/her
decisions in regard to the relevant interests and values.
References
Blasi, A. (1980).
Bridging moral cognition and moral action: A critical review
of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 88,
1-45.
Collins, W. R. &
Miller, K. (1992). A paramedic method for computing
professionals. Journal of Systems and Software, 13,
47-84.
Friedman, B. (2005). Value sensitive
design and information systems. Available: http://www.ischool.washington.edu/vsd/vsd-and-information-systems.pdf
Gotterbarn, D. & Rogerson, S. (2002).
Project Planning Software [Computer software], East Tennessee
State University.
Green, J.D., Nystrom, L.E., Engell,
A.D., Darey, J.M., Cohen, J.D. (2004). The neural bases of
cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron,
44, 389-400.
Haidt, J. (2001). The
emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist
approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review,
108, 814-834.
Jackson, J. (1994).
Coping with scepticism: About the philosopher’s role in
teaching ethical business. Business Ethics: A European
Review, 3, 171-173.
Jaffee, S. & Hyde, J.
S. (2000). Gender differences in moral orientation: A
meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126,
703-726.
Kohlberg, L. (1985).
The Just Community: Approach to moral education in theory and
practice. In M. Berkowitz and F. Oser (Eds.), Moral
education: Theory and application (pp. 27-87). Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Pfeiffer, R. S.
(1999). Ethics on the job: Cases and strategies.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Piaget, J. (1932).
The moral judgment of the child. London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul.
Schwartz, B. (2000).
Self-determination: The tyranny of freedom. American
Psychologist, 55, 79-88.
Sunstein, C. R.
(2005). Moral heuristics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
28, 531-573.
Winograd, T. (1995).
Computers, ethics and social responsibility. In D. G. Johnson
and H. Nissebaum (Eds.) Computers, Ethics and Social
Values (pp. 25-39). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
|