1 Kommentar zu “(Deutsch) Ethik&Informatik!?”

1. Chris Wood (Tuesday 26 August 2008)

   Ethics & Informatics

   Computer scientists have little effect on the use of computers. It is the ethics of all people that matters. Politicians are particularly important. Democratic politicians are generally better than the others. But all politicians behave worse towards foreigners. This is sometimes justified, since otherwise the more ethical countries would lose out. But I find it sad that so many normal people are happy about this. Although Germany is better than most countries, I guess I am sensitized to this through living outside England. Arms exports from developed countries greatly exceed development aid. Asylum seekers are sent back to misery. Dozens of “collateral” deaths seem less important than one “own” dead soldier.
   The computer is a rather neutral tool. One cannot hope that Chinese technicians will refuse to implement internet censoring. There was a slight chance that Google would refuse to cooperate, but this was decided by businessmen, (some of whom were admittedly originally computer scientists). In areas such as child-pornography computer scientists have even less influence.

   All growth in technology, if it is to increase human happiness, requires a corresponding increase in wisdom!
   I too like Bertrand Russell, but cannot agree with this quotation.
   (This version was doubly translated; can someone find the original)?
   For instance the advent of bicycles reduced the number of handicapped (especially mentally handicapped) in villages. The young men could get to another village after work, so inbreeding was greatly reduced. I do not see that wisdom was needed. Riding a bike requires skill, but not wisdom, and there is a natural tendency to avoid inbreeding.
   Do washing machines and safety razors require wisdom?
   Russell was probably emphasizing the need for care with nuclear reactions, and also referring to the industrial revolution. The latter was belatedly bringing a general increase in wellbeing, at least in developed countries, when he was young.

   “We can all judge whether an action is ethical or unethical”.
   This is very dubious. Who are “we”? The sentence hints that “we” have a common opinion about ethics, which is nonsense. No two people really agree, and different religions have very different opinions. The UN charter is not a common denominator; I doubt whether half the people in the world agree with it. There is a common element in Churches, but it does not include general biophilie. It concentrates on people.

   I find it strange that the discovery of time is regarded as important, but not the discovery of space. Also medicine is naturally very important; it has increased the problem of the population explosion.

   After this niggling criticism, I want to express my admiration for the energy and vision that Roland brings to postings about current German ethical and management problems. I hope that plenty of people will take his words to heart.
   For a universal long-term view of ethics see
   http://if-blog.de/fr/cw/ethik-nach-dem-humanismus/#more-215

Kommentar verfassen