Graduate studies at Western
Ethics and Information Technology 9 (1):73-87 (2007)
|Abstract||Standard agent and action-based approaches in computer ethics tend to have difficulty dealing with complex systems-level issues such as the digital divide and globalisation. This paper argues for a value-based agenda to complement traditional approaches in computer ethics, and that one value-based approach well-suited to technological domains can be found in capability theory. Capability approaches have recently become influential in a number of fields with an ethical or policy dimension, but have not so far been applied in computer ethics. The paper introduces two major versions of the theory – those advanced by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum – and argues that they offer potentially valuable conceptual tools for computer ethics. By developing a theory of value based on core human functionings and the capabilities (powers, freedoms) required to realise them, capability theory is shown to have a number of potential benefits that complement standard ethical theory, opening up new approaches to analysis and providing a framework that incorporates a justice as well as an ethics dimension. The underlying functionalism of capability theory is seen to be particularly appropriate to technology ethics, enabling the integration of normative and descriptive analysis of technology in terms of human needs and values. The paper concludes by considering some criticisms of the theory and directions for further development|
|Keywords||capability theory computer ethics empowerment freedom justice values|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Dennis C. Smolarski & Tamsen Whitehead (2000). Ethics in the Classroom. Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (2):255-264.
Serena Olsaretti (2005). Endorsement and Freedom in Amartya Sen's Capability Approach. Economics and Philosophy 21 (1):89-108.
Melanie Walker (2010). Critical Capability Pedagogies and University Education. Educational Philosophy and Theory 42 (8):898-917.
James H. Moor (1999). Just Consequentialism and Computing. Ethics and Information Technology 1 (1):61-65.
Philip Brey (2000). Method in Computer Ethics: Towards a Multi-Level Interdisciplinary Approach. [REVIEW] Ethics and Information Technology 2 (2):125-129.
Thomas Pogge (2002). Can the Capability Approach Be Justified? Philosophical Topics 30 (2):167-228.
Jay Drydyk (2012). A Capability Approach to Justice as a Virtue. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (1):23-38.
Colleen Murphy & Paolo Gardoni (2010). Assessing Capability Instead of Achieved Functionings in Risk Analysis. Journal of Risk Research 13 (2):137-147.
Mark Coeckelbergh (2011). Human Development or Human Enhancement? A Methodological Reflection on Capabilities and the Evaluation of Information Technologies. Ethics and Information Technology 13 (2):81-92.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #86,080 of 740,918 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,802 of 740,918 )
How can I increase my downloads?