Skip to main content
Log in

Delegating and Distributing Morality: Can We Inscribe Privacy Protection in a Machine?

  • Published:
Ethics and Information Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper addresses the question of delegation of morality to a machine, through a consideration of whether or not non-humans can be considered to be moral. The aspect of morality under consideration here is protection of privacy. The topic is introduced through two cases where there was a failure in sharing and retaining personal data protected by UK data protection law, with tragic consequences. In some sense this can be regarded as a failure in the process of delegating morality to a computer database. In the UK, the issues that these cases raise have resulted in legislation designed to protect children which allows for the creation of a huge database for children. Paradoxically, we have the situation where we failed to use digital data in enforcing the law to protect children, yet we may now rely heavily on digital technologies to care for children. I draw on the work of Floridi, Sanders, Collins, Kusch, Latour and Akrich, a spectrum of work stretching from philosophy to sociology of technology and the “seamless web” or “actor–network” approach to studies of technology. Intentionality is considered, but not deemed necessary for meaningful moral behaviour. Floridi’s and Sanders’ concept of “distributed morality” accords with the network of agency characterized by actor–network approaches. The paper concludes that enfranchizing non-humans, in the shape of computer databases of personal data, as moral agents is not necessarily problematic but a balance of delegation of morality must be made between human and non-human actors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • A. Adam (2005) Gender, Ethics and Information Technology Palgrave Macmillan Houndmills, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • M. Akrich (1997) The De-Scription of Technical Objects W.E. Bijker J. Law (Eds) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change MIT Press Cambridge, MA and London 205–224

    Google Scholar 

  • A.L. Allen (1998) Privacy A.M. Jaggar I.M. Young (Eds) A Companion to Feminist Philosophy Blackwell Malden, MA and Oxford 456–465

    Google Scholar 

  • H.M. Collins (1985) Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice Sage London, Beverly Hills and New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • H.M. Collins (1990) Artificial Experts: Social Knowledge and␣Intelligent Machines MIT Press Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • H.M. Collins M. Kusch (1998) The Shape of Actions: What Machines and Humans Can Do MIT Press Cambridge, MA and London

    Google Scholar 

  • H.M. Collins S. Yearley (1992) Epistemological Chicken A. Pickering (Eds) Science as Practice and Culture University of Chicago Press Chicago and London 301–326

    Google Scholar 

  • D.C. Dennett (1994) The Myth of Original Intentionality E. Dietrich (Eds) Thinking Computers and Virtual Persons: Essays on the Intentionality of Machines Academic Press San Diego, CA and London 91–107

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Floridi J.W. Sanders (2004) ArticleTitleOn the Morality of Artificial Agents Minds and Machines 14 IssueID3 349–379 Occurrence Handle10.1023/B:MIND.0000035461.63578.9d

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • J. Gips (1995) Towards the Ethical Robot K.M. Ford C. Glymour P.J. Hayes (Eds) Android Epistemology MIT Press Cambridge, MA and London 243–252

    Google Scholar 

  • G. Kewney. No, Mrs Duval, You CANNOT Track a Mobile Human by Wireless Like a Car! http://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/548, available online, accessed 23rd March, 2005, 2002

  • B. Latour (1997) Where are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts W.E. Bijker J. Law (Eds) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change MIT Press Cambridge, MA and London 225–258

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Room. Meeting the Challenges of the Victoria Climbie & Soham Cases, http://www.dpalaw.info available online, accessed 23rd March, 2005, 2004

  • J.R. Searle (1987) Minds, Brains and Programs R. Born (Eds) Artificial Intelligence: The Case Against Croom Helm London and Sydney 18–40

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Winner (1993) ArticleTitleUpon Opening the Black Box and Finding it Empty: Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Technology Science, Technology & Human Values 18 IssueID3 362–378

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alison Adam.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Adam, A. Delegating and Distributing Morality: Can We Inscribe Privacy Protection in a Machine?. Ethics Inf Technol 7, 233–242 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-006-0013-3

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-006-0013-3

Keywords

Navigation