Ethics Exam #2
According to Aristotle
"only the truly good man will perform the actions required by virtue without objection or strain and feel the right kind of pleasure in doing them."
5. Virtue Ethics is culturally relative
- no more than any other theory - Less so than other theories, because eudaimonia (flourishing) of humans goes to basic facts about us: We are social animals (like elephants and wolves, and not like polar bears) Some of our natural impulses are altruistic and cooperative (against Hobbes)
3. There is no way to know what to do when virtues come into conflict. Example: honesty vs. loyalty: disclosing the accounting mistake honesty vs. kindness: telling the truth about how she looks in those pants
-Practical wisdom gives the virtuous agent the resources to make a judgment (must see the most salient moral problems that must be addressed) and some dilemmas really are irresolvable (sometimes there's no perfectly right answer, there just isn't. Happens more often than we are comfortable admitting)
4. There is no rule-like decision procedure that a not-yet-virtuous person could understand and use
-yes there is, one could appeal to v-rules
New York v. Ferber 1982
1. Government has compelling interest in protecting children. 2. Distribution of child pornography is intrinsically related to the sexual abuse of children. 3. Advertising and selling child porn provided economic motive for producing child porn. 4. Child porn has negligible artistic value. 5. Therefore, child porn need not be legally obscene to be outlawed. Child porn doesn't have to pass the 3 prongs of obscenity, it is its own category that is not protected by the 1st Amendment
1st Amendment to US Constitution Has Exceptions (Freedom of Expression not an Absolute Right)
1st amendment covers political and nonpolitical speech right of freedom of expression must be balanced against the public good various restrictions on freedom of expression exist such as saying things that put the public at risk or in danger
Other things passed in the 2003 PROTECT ACT (laws to protect children are still being made)
AMBER ALERT Mandatory life sentence for second sex offense against a minor. Authorizes wiretapping in cases related to child abuse or kidnapping. Eliminates waiting period for law enforcement to investigate missing person if a minor. Eliminates statute of limitations for child abduction or child abuse.
How often do hate crimes occur?
According to the FBI, reported hate crimes increased slightly, from 7,462 in 2002 to 7,489 in 2003. The 7,489 hate crime incidents reported to the FBI involved 8,715 separate offenses, 9,100 victims, and 6,934 known offenders. Racial bias represented the largest percentage of bias-motivated incidents (51.3%), followed by Religion Bias (17.9%), Sexual Orientation Bias (16.5%), Ethnicity Bias (13.7%), and Disability Bias (0.4%). Anti-black bias was the most prevalent racial motivation, with 2,548 incidents (34% of all hate crimes); anti-male homosexual bias was the most common sexual orientation motivation, with 783 incidents (10.5% of all hate crimes). The number of reported anti-Islamic crimes decreased from 155 in 2002 to 149 in 2003, a decrease of 0.4%. In addition, the number of hate crimes directed at individuals on the basis of their national origin/ethnicity also decreased ¬¬- from 1,102 in 2002 to 1,026 in 2003.
Where do hate crimes usually occur?
According to the FBI, the highest percentage of reported hate crimes (32%) occurred on or near residential properties. The FBI also reports that 19% of hate crimes committed took place on highways, roads, alleys, or streets. Another 11% of those crimes took place at schools and colleges, while 28% were widely distributed across different locations.
Can universities prevent the use of their computer services for the promotion of extremist views?
Because private universities are not agents of the government, they may forbid users from engaging in offensive speech using university equipment or university services; however, public universities, as agents of the government, must follow the First Amendment's prohibition against speech restrictions based on content or viewpoint. Nonetheless, public universities may promulgate content-neutral regulations that effectively prevent the use of school facilities or services by extremists. For example, a university may limit use of its computers and server to academic activities only. This would likely prevent a student from creating a racist Web site for propaganda purposes or from sending racist e-mail from his or her student e-mail account. One such policy -- at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana -- stipulates that its computer services are "provided in support of the educational, research and public service missions of the University and its use must be limited to those purposes." Universities depend on an atmosphere of academic freedom and uninhibited expression. Any decision to limit speech on a university campus -- even speech in cyberspace -- will inevitably affect this ideal. College administrators should confer with representatives from both the faculty and student body when implementing such policies.
Virtues
Beneficence Compassion Courage Fairness Generosity Honesty Tolerance Trustworthiness Loyalty Humility Industriousness
Freedom of Expression History
De Scandalis Magnatum (England, 1275) Court of Star Chamber 18th Century No prior restraints on publication People could be punished for sedition or libel American states adopted bill of rights including freedom of speech Freedom of Expression in 1st amendment to U.S. constitution
Obscene
Definition provided by the supreme court Miller v. California Supreme Court Miller 3 Prong Test- Obscene broadcasts are those where: 1. the average person would find that the work taken as a whole appeals to the purient interest in sex (overly excessive) 2. Depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way 3. taken as a whole, the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value absolutely no first amendment protections. you can not use it on broadcast television. Better definition than indecent
V-Rules (Hursthouse)
Do what is honest Do what is charitable Do what is generous Do what is fair Do what is compassionate Do what is responsible Don't do what is... list of vices
Ethical Evaluation of Government Regulation of the Internet
Enlightenment View (Kant, Mill): You can't tell people what to do, you have to let them decide for themselves, you can't crack down on their rationality, responsible for their own choices Jeffry Reiman: behavior makes sense if they have no hope for a better future; society bears responsibility for putting people in hopeless situations
Even FCC acknowledges that sometimes words need to be used to express emotions that just can't be expressed in any other way
Ex. Boston Red Sox after bombing, use of F word
History of Censorship
FCC v. Pacifica 1973 On July 3, 1978, the Supreme Court reached a decision in the Pacifica case by ruling that indecent speech may be restricted. The Court said that the FCC has the right to regulate broadcasting more restrictively than other mediums of expression because of the ease with which children can listen to a broadcast. The Supreme Court made it clear that the Pacifica decision was to be considered narrowly tailored to the facts in the case. 1987: These three radio cases led the FCC to declare its new intention to follow a more "generic" legal standard treating the seven dirty words only as examples of indecency. June, 1995, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals made 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. the safe harbor for all stations. 2000: Congress enacts the Child Internet Protection Act. 2004 FCC announces crackdown (big fines) on public broadcasts of 'fleeting expletives' and indecency in the wake of incidents like Cher, Bono, and Janet Jackson. 2009: FCC v. Fox Television—Supreme court upholds FCC regulation of indecent language on TV
Communication Addiction Disorder
Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram etc. we lose an important amount of body and facial cues gives you lots of time to think about what you say that you're at a loss in normal conversations when you have to respond immediately depression, anxiety,
What exactly are Internet "filters" and when is their use appropriate?
Filters are software that can be installed along with a Web browser to block access to certain Web sites that include inappropriate or offensive material. For example, parents may choose to install filters on their children's computers in order to prevent them from viewing sites that contain pornography or other problematic material. ADL has developed the HateFilter�, a filter that blocks access to Web sites that advocate hatred, bigotry, or violence towards Jews or other groups on the basis of their religion, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or other immutable characteristics. HateFilter�, which can be downloaded from ADL's Web site, contains a "redirect" feature that offers users who try to access a blocked site the chance to link directly to related ADL educational material. The voluntary use of filtering software in private institutions or by parents in the home does not violate the First Amendment because such use involves no government action. There are also some commercially marketed filters that focus on offensive words and phrases. Such filters, which are not site-based, are designed primarily to screen out obscene and pornographic material.
Virtual Child Pornography (unprotected by 1st Amendment)
Forms of simulated child pornography include: modified photographs of real children, non-minor teenagers made to look younger (age regression), and fully computer-generated imagery or adults made to look like children. CPPA: "any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture" that "is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct."
2002 U.S. Supreme Court Case: Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (not in effect)
Free Speech Coalition (trade organization for adult entertainment industry) brings a case against government challenging the constitutionality of CPPA (1st Amendment). The Supreme Court struck down CPPA for being overly broad, e.g., it had the effect of prohibiting a broad range of artistic work, including films like Romeo and Juliet and American Beauty.
Westboro Baptist Church
God Hates Fags spends $250,000 on picketing, and they get the money for filing suit for people who try to stop their first amendment rights been protested by the Ku Klux Klan Against Jews, gays, military focus on "obey God" they make the claim that bad things happen because we are tolerant of homosexuals fags and fag enablers are worthy of death
Eudaimonia
Greek, no satisfying translation in English a different sense of happiness and flourishing a virtuous life with practical wisdom leads to eudaimonia
Arguments Against Criminalization of Virtual Child Porn
Harm Principle: It does not harm an actual person in making VCP, so by the harm principle, the liberty of persons producing VCP should not be interfered with. Fairness: Restricting A's liberty merely because of possible consequences places an unfair burden on A. (Restriction of liberty is a burden without benefits.) Paternalism: The duty of protection of children should fall on the parents, not the government. Rights-based theory: Banning VCP starts society on a slippery slope and opens the door to banning other offensive art forms, and threatens the violation of the right to free expression. Cultural Relativism: Moral views about child sex is culturally relative. Not all cultures consider it to be wrong.
How do hate crimes affect local communities?
Hate crimes are committed with the intent not only of sending a message to the targeted victim, but also to the community as a whole. The damage done to victims and to communities through hate crimes cannot be qualified adequately if one only considers physical injury. The damage to the very fabric of a community where a hate crime has occurred must also be taken into account. Hate crimes. in effect, create a kind of public injury because they rapidly erode public confidence in being kept free and safe from these crimes. To that extent, crimes of this nature can traumatize entire communities.
Why do hate crimes occur?
Hate crimes often occur as a result of prejudice and ignorance. A lack of understanding about differences among people and their traditions contributes to fear and intolerance. Left unaddressed, these sentiments may often lead to acts of intimidation and ultimately hate-motivated violence.
Trust Issues
Identity theft Police chat room sting operations- entrapment, doing the things that they arrest people for when they go undercover Digitally enhanced advertising Self "Identity enhancement" Need for verification of others' identities Cyberbullying Underground markets
Can hate crimes laws be used against hate on the Internet?
If a person's use of the Internet rises to the level of criminal conduct, it may subject the perpetrator to an enhanced sentence under a State's hate crime laws. Currently, 40 States and the District of Columbia have such laws in place. The criminal's sentence may be more severe if the prosecution can prove that he or she intentionally selected the victim based on his or her race, nationality, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. However, these laws do not apply to conduct or speech protected by the First Amendment.
Are there any statistics available on youth-initiated hate crimes?
In 1990, the Los Angeles County Commission on Human Relations reported that approximately one-third of all Los Angeles County schools had experiences with hate crimes. The Bureau of Justice Assistance reported that in 1994, young people under the age of 20 carried out nearly half of all hate crimes committed. According to the Chicago Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the FBI, and other researchers, hate crime perpetrators are usually under the age of 26. These facts further underscore the importance of intervening with young children as early as possible.
Does bias have to be the only motivation in order to charge someone with a hate crime?
In general, no, although the answer may depend on how courts in a particular jurisdiction or State have interpreted its hate crime laws. It is not uncommon for people to commit crimes for more than one reason. Many hate crimes are successfully prosecuted even when motivations in addition to bias are proven.
How does the law in foreign countries differ from American law regarding hate on the Internet? Can an American citizen be subject to criminal charges abroad for sending or posting material that is illegal in other countries?
In most countries, hate speech does not receive the same constitutional protection as it does in the United States. In Germany, for example, it is illegal to promote Nazi ideology, and in many European countries, it is illegal to deny the reality of the Holocaust. Authorities in Denmark, France, Britain, Germany, and Canada have brought charges for crimes involving hate speech on the Internet. While national borders have little meaning in cyberspace, Internet users who export material that is illegal in some foreign countries may be subject to prosecution under certain circumstances. American citizens who post material on the Internet that is illegal in a foreign country could be prosecuted if they subjected themselves to the jurisdiction of that country or of another country whose extradition laws would allow for arrest and deportation. However, under American law, the United States will not extradite a person for engaging in a constitutionally protected activity even if that activity violates a criminal law elsewhere.
Virtue Ethics (Inspired by Aristotle and Plato)
Instead of what should I do? We ask What kind of person should I be? And the right action follows an action is right if and only if (and because) it is what a virtuous agent would not fail to perform in the circumstances under consideration you just do the decent and honorable thing to do
Are hate crimes decreasing or increasing?
It is difficult to tell if hate crimes are on the rise or on the decline. On the one hand, reporting hate crimes is a voluntary action taken by States and localities. Some States with clear histories of racial prejudice and intolerance have reported zero incidents of hate crimes. At the same time, many victims of hate crimes are often reluctant to come forward -- a direct result of the trauma caused by the crime. Although the Hate Crime Statistics Act was passed in 1990, States have only been collecting and reporting information about these crimes to the FBI since 1991. It appears that for those States and localities that have reported hate crimes, the number of incidents nationwide has continued to hover annually somewhere between 6,000 and 8,600. Again, this may be indicative simply of the reporting or non-reporting trends of different localities
Is it immoral to look at virtual child porn?
It's not ethically crime, because there is no real child
Ethical Evaluations of CIPA
Kantian evaluation: CIPA is wrong because filtering websites that really don't need to be blocked which means using mere means Act Utilitarian evaluation: depends on how benefits and harms are weighed Social Contract Theory: freedom of conscience should be given precedence
History of Virtual Child Porn
New York v. Ferber 1982 (own category outside 1st Amendment protection) Child Pornography Protection Act (CPPA) 1996 (law) Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (too broad) PROTECT ACT 2003 (law including 3 prong test)
Who commits hate crimes?
Of the 6,934 identified hate crime offenders, the majority were white (4,317, or 62.3%); 1,286 (18.5%) were black, 61 (0.9%) were American Indian or Alaskan Native, 93 (1.3%) were Asian or Pacific Islander, 741 (10.7%) were of unknown race, and the remaining 436 (6.3%) were of other races or multiple races. The five states with the highest numbers of hate crime were: California (1,472 incidents, 19.7% of total reported incidents), New York (602, 8%), New Jersey (594, 7.9%), Michigan (427, 5.7%), and Massachusetts (403, 5.4%). These five states comprise 46.7% of all incidents reported in the United States.
Legal History of Child Porn
Prior to 1996: Two categories of speech outside of 1st Amendment protections: 1. Obscenity (Pacifica vs. FCC) 2. Child Pornography (New York v. Ferber 1982)
2003 PROTECT Act (still in effect)
Prohibits computer-generated child pornography when "such visual depiction is a computer image or computer-generated image that is, or appears virtually indistinguishable from that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct Must meet Miller 3-prong obscenity condition (unlike the 1996 CPPA)
Vices
Selfishness Brutality/indifference Cowardice Injustice Greed Dishonesty Bigotry Irresponsibility Disloyalty Arrogance Laziness
Westboro Baptist Church (Phelps) went to Matthew Snyder's funeral after he was killed in Iraq (Snyder v. Phelps)
Snyder's father won for intentional inflection of emotional distress but then the decision was reversed, because the church was protected by first amendment free speech WBC has come the closest to crossing the line over any other case that we have seen recently. Anything that advances some kind of political view being expressed is ok. They weren't targeting Snyder specifically, they were using his funeral as a venue to promote their political view. Majority Justices of the supreme court said: "Westboro addressed matters of public import on public property, in a peaceful manner, in full compliance with the guidance of local officials. It did not disrupt Matthew Snyder's funeral, and its choice to picket tat that time and place did not alter the nature of its speech. Because this Nation has chosen to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that public debate is not stifled, Westboro must be shielded from tort liability for its picketing in this case"
Why can't the government ban use of the Internet to spread hateful and racist ideology in the United States?
The Internet operates across national borders, and efforts by the international community or by any one government to regulate its contents would be virtually impossible, both technologically and legally. In the United States, the First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right of freedom of speech to all Americans, even those whose opinions are reprehensible by most people's standards. In a number of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that the government may not regulate the content of Internet speech to an extent greater than it may regulate speech in more traditional areas of expression such as the print media, the broadcast media, or the public square. While courts may take into account the Internet's vast reach and accessibility, they must still approach attempts to censor or regulate speech online from a traditional constitutional framework.
Is there any kind of hate speech on the Internet that is not protected by the First Amendment?
The U.S. Constitution protects Internet speech that is merely critical, annoying, offensive, or demeaning. However, the First Amendment does not provide a shield for libelous speech or copyright infringement, nor does it protect certain speech that threatens or harasses other people. For example, an e-mail or a posting on a Web site that expresses a clear intention or threat by its author to commit an unlawful act against another specific person is likely to be actionable under criminal law. Persistent or pernicious harassment aimed at a specific individual is not protected if it inflicts or intends to inflict emotional or physical harm. To rise to this level, harassment on the Internet would have to consist of a "course of conduct" rather than a single isolated instance. A difficulty in enforcing laws against harassment is the ease of anonymous communication on the Internet. Using a service that provides almost complete anonymity, a bigot may repeatedly e-mail his or her victim without being readily identified.
Besides filters, what are some other ways that adults, especially parents, can protect children from the dangerous aspects of the Internet?
The fist and most important step is to help children understand that online hate exists. At the same time, help children recognize that as much as responsible citizens may abhor the fact that hate groups and hateful individuals use this medium to spread messages of bias, hatred, and disharmony, the U.S. Constitution protects their right to do so. This is an important lesson in democratic values. By no means do fair-minded people condone hate behavior, but this must be weighed against the importance of protecting free speech. Help children develop the critical thinking skills necessary to counter all of the hateful things that they will see and hear -- on the Internet as well as in other media -- with accurate knowledge and a commitment to respecting all people. Additional recommendations for helping children safely navigate the Internet include the following: Talk with children about the dangers of the Internet before they begin using it. Tell children that not all of the information on the World Wide Web is accurate. Stress the importance of not revealing personal information to strangers over the Internet. Place computers in common areas so that what is on the screen can be easily seen by adults. Set clear rules and limits for Internet use. Carefully monitor children's use of chat rooms. Talk to children about their experiences on the Internet; ask them about sites that they are visiting for schoolwork or for personal enjoyment. Encourage children to ask questions about what they see on the Internet. Participate in children's Internet explorations by visiting and discussing Web sites together. Expose children to Internet sites that enable them to create, to design, to invent, and to collaborate with children in other communities in ways that contribute to society in positive ways. Become familiar with basic Internet technologies and keep up to date on the topic by reading resource publication
What can we do to prevent the spread of hate-motivated behavior?
The most important thing that adults can do to reduce the spread of hate-motivated behavior is to help young people learn to respect and celebrate diversity. Research shows that children between the ages of 5 and 8 begin to place value judgments on similarities and differences among people. Moreover, children's racial attitudes begin to harden by the fourth grade, making the guidance of adults during this time period particularly important. It is essential that adults talk openly and honestly with children about diversity, racism, and prejudice. In schools, teachers and administrators should engage in educational efforts to dispel myths and stereotypes about particular groups of people and whenever possible work with parents and local law enforcement authorities so that such an effort is supported on many fronts.
Can a hate crime be committed with words alone?
The use of bigoted and prejudiced language does not in and of itself violate hate crime laws. This type of offense is frequently classified as a bias incident. However, when words threaten violence, or when bias-motivated graffiti damages or destroys property, hate crime laws may apply.
May public schools and public libraries install filters on computer equipment available for public use?
The use of filters by public institutions, such as schools and libraries, has become a hotly contested issue that remains unresolved. At least one Federal court has ruled that a local library board may not require the use of filtering software on all library Internet computer terminals. A possible compromise for public libraries with multiple computers would be to allow unrestricted Internet use for adults, but to provide only supervised access for children. Courts have not ruled on the constitutionality of hate speech filters on public school library computers. However, given the broad free speech rights afforded to students by the First Amendment, it is unlikely that courts would allow school libraries to require filters on all computers available for student use.
Has anyone ever been successfully prosecuted in the United States for sending racist threats via e-mail?
There is legal precedent for such a prosecution. In 1998, a former student was sentenced to one year in prison for sending e-mail death threats to 60 Asian-American students at the University of California, Irvine. His e-mail was signed "Asian hater" and threatened that he would "make it my life career [sic] to find and kill everyone one [sic] of you personally." That same year, another California man pled guilty to Federal civil rights charges after he sent racist e-mail threats to dozens of Latinos throughout the country.
What is a hate crime?
These are crimes committed against individuals or groups or property based on the real or perceived race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, national origin, or ethnicity of the victims. The role played by these personal characteristics in motivating the offender is the key difference between hate crimes and other crimes.
Mill on (Freedom of Expression)
Those who don't hear an opposing opinion are deprived more than those who cannot express it because: if the opinion is right, they are deprived of opportunity to exchange error for truth. if the opinion is wrong they are deprived of the livelier impression of truth produced by its collision with error all silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility even if it is an error, there might be partial truth The meaning of a doctrine or the prevailing opinion will be in danger of being lost, enfeebled, or deprived of its vital effect if we don't discuss it
Practical Wisdom
To be virtuous is to be a certain sort of person with a complex makeup Feels in the right way at the right time Is sensitive to particular features of a situation Thinks rationally Has experience Views morally right action as context-dependent (the situation and the particulars of the situation matters) Possesses many virtues Knows what virtue(s) is most salient in specific situations Finds creative solutions, rather than strictly following rules Acts as the virtuous agent would act they take the knowledge that they have and knows how to apply it and what is relevant. Being wise is also identifying what they don't know and they know how to find out what they need to know to be wise takes experience
Fun History of Censorship
Tweetie bird originally drawn plucked, which made him look naked 1952 Lucille Ball in interracial marriage, got pregnant, they couldn't use the word pregnant on the show, they also sleep in separate twin beds 1956 Only filmed Elvis from the waste up, because of his hip movements I Dream of Jeannie couldn't show her belly button 1990's internet started to become a problem, where there is no regulation, congress passed child protection act June 1995 10pm-6am the safe harbor for all stations 2000 enhancement of child internet protection 2004 Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunction and Bono 2009 FCC beat Fox supreme court upholds FCC regulation of indecent language on TV
Arguments for Criminalization of Virtual Child Porn
Utilitarianism: If there is any possibility of harm to children, the weight of that harm orrides any other benefits. Humanity Formulation: It treats children as mere means (it objectifies them). Social Contract Theory: It does not satisfy the spirit of the social contract, which recognizes the value of protecting children, and our societal agreement that such a value is often primary over others. Social Contract Theory: It does not contribute to advancing any social good; it has little if any social value; there are other forms of art that could satisfy the artist's need to express herself without using children. Virtue Ethics: It is not what a virtuous person would do. It is not beneficent or temperant.
Children and Inappropriate Content
Web filter (installed by schools and libraries receiving federal networking funds): software that prevents display of certain web pages Methodologies: maintain blacklist of objectionable sites; examine content for objectionable words and phrases US Supreme court ruled CIPA did not violate 1st amendment guarantee problems: over filtering- things being blocked that don't need to be too many sites to filter people can decide for each other what is and isn't appropriate
1996
When the world wide web started really growing and virtual technology became a problem
Is there an increase in hate crimes following a national crisis or during other difficult times?
While direct correlations are always difficult to establish, there is strong evidence that when the country is faced with traumatic events, such as the tragic events at the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001, hate crimes escalate. In the weeks following the events of September 11th, for example, the FBI initiated numerous hate crime investigations involving reported attacks on Arab- American citizens and institutions. These attacks ranged from verbal harassment to physical assaults. There were also reports of mosques being firebombed or vandalized. Attacks on people with no cultural, political, or ethnic affinity with any Middle Eastern group, but who 'looked Arab' or 'looked Muslim' also became common following the emotional upheaval that followed the attack. In the wake of the overwhelming response to the toll-free hotline established to document claims of discrimination, harassment, and hate crimes following the September 11th terrorist attacks, the United States Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) expanded its capacity to collect information by initiating a second toll-free hotline. During one 12-hour period following the attacks, the volume of calls peaked at approximately 70 calls per hour.
2. VE is circular, i.e., 'the virtuous act is one the virtuous agent would do' is circular. (already presupposes what is good)
Yes, it's circular, but not viciously so. Virtuous acts must be defined in terms of a complete definition of virtue, including how virtuous acts feel. (It's not just about acts.)
1. Practical Wisdom is rare (how are you supposed to know what to do)
Yes, practical wisdom is rare, but we should constantly strive to attain it. It takes time and experience. (Might role models be useful?)
6. Virtue ethics is 'egoistic.' (It is focused on the moral agent's flourishing.)
Yes, the virtues benefit their possessor. But if kindness, compassion, generosity, fairness, etc. are egoistic virtues, then so much the better for egoism if we all cared about making ourselves into these characters
Can commercial Internet Service Providers (ISPs) prevent the use of their services by extremists?
Yes. Commercial ISPs, such as America Online (AOL), may voluntarily agree to prohibit users from sending racist or bigoted messages over their services. Such prohibitions do not implicate First Amendment rights because they are entered into through private contracts and do not involve government action in any way. Once an ISP commits to such regulations, it must monitor the use of its service to ensure that the regulations are followed. If a violation does occur, the ISP should, as a contractual matter, take action to prevent it from happening again. For example, if a participant in a chat room engages in racist speech in violation of the "terms of service" of the ISP, his or her account could be cancelled, or the person could be forbidden from using the chat room in the future. ISPs should encourage users to report suspected violations to company representatives. The effectiveness of this remedy is limited, however. Any subscriber to an ISP who loses his or her account for violating that ISP's regulations may resume propagating hate by subsequently signing up with any of the dozens of more permissive ISPs in the marketplace.
Has anyone ever been held liable in the United States for encouraging acts of violence on the World Wide Web?
Yes. In 1999, a coalition of groups opposed to abortion was ordered to pay over $100 million in damages for providing information for a Web site called "Nuremberg Files," a site which posed a threat to the safety of a number of doctors and clinic workers who perform abortions. The site posted photos of abortion providers, their home addresses, license plate numbers, and the names of their spouses and children. In three instances, after a doctor listed on the site was murdered, a line was drawn through his name. Although the site fell short of explicitly calling for an assault on doctors, the jury found that the information it contained amounted to a real threat of bodily harm.
Virtue
a trait of character (disposition) to not only act, but to feel and think in a certain way that "goes all the way down" (it permeates us through and through) if they're truly compassionate, they will never fail to be compassionate in circumstances that require compassion we acquire virtue by habituation (Aristotle)- starts when we're children, we tell them how to behave, eventually by habit they act virtuously, as the mature they start to understand and think about why and it starts to become a part of their rational being, they start to embrace the reasons for it and start to feel the right way about being virtuous (they feel good about it)
Trust
an unspoken hope that somebody is going to take a specific course of action
Sodomy
any kind of sexual act not aimed at procreation; not a term aimed entirely at homosexuals, heterosexuals perform sodomy too
Addiction
coping strategies- dealing with stress dependence/ need- getting along with it is not possible Neurological perspective- shoppoholics, gambling, sex if it is not a substance then it at least needs to be a behavior - and using the internet seems to qualify
Child Pornography
defined by law as the visual depiction of a person under the age of 18 engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This means that any image of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct is illegal contraband. Notably, the legal definition of sexually explicit conduct does not require that an image depict a child engaging in sexual activity. A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive.
A wise person (a virtuous person)
employs utilitarianism (considers the consequences) knows rules must sometimes be followed knows rules can sometimes be broken
Child Internet Protection Act (CIPA)
enacted by Congress in 2000 to address concerns about children's access to obscene or harmful content over the Internet imposes certain requirements on schools or libraries that receive discounts for Internet access or internal connections through the E-rate program - a program that makes certain communications services and products more affordable for eligible schools and libraries In early 2001, the FCC issued rules implementing CIPA and provided updates to those rules in 2011.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
gets complaints about language on public broadcasting Everyone generally just avoids the 7 dirty words
Forms of Direct Censorship
government monopolization prepublication review licensing and registration
Megan Meier
hung herself and got cyberbullying attention; Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act
If you're truly a cultural relativist
if you think the only difference is that that's what they think and that's what we think you can't make evaluations of cultural judgements Ex. You can't say Natzis were wrong you can't say that we have made moral strides compared to other cultures ...but really it's not that the virtues were bad it's that the facts were wrong (the Natzis misapplied their virtues of loyalty) there's a difference between being tolerant and thinking that peoples cultural decisions are acceptable
Paternalism
interfering with someone for their own good
The FCC's definition of Indecent
language or material that in context depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory activities or organs Problem: who sets the standard? What defines a contemporary community? protected by first amendment and can't be banned entirely, can be restricted during certain times of day when children are at risk to see it
Compulsion
less complicated than addiction, little ticks, aware, arbitrary, feel the need to do it but not necessarily pleasure related
Hate speech on the internet that is not protected by the first amendment
libel (publishing something false) copyright infringement intentional infliction of emotional harm (really difficult to make this argument stick, because an individual has to show that it has sustained harm) harassment (has to have a pattern)
Challenges Posed by the Internet
many-to-many communications dynamic connections huge numbers of web sites extends beyond national borders (laws) hard to distinguish between minors and adults
Self-Censorship
most common form of censorship things that the gov don't want to get out there group decides for itself not to publish something for their reputation ratings systems are created to advise potential audiences
FCC Profane Definition
refers to irreverence toward God or holy things, including language so grossly offensive to the members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance
Autonomy
respect the individual's self determination being the author of one's own life making decisions for oneself without interference
Slander
spread gossip through speech
Libel
spread gossip through writing
Censorship
the attempt to suppress or regulate public access to material considered offensive or harmful
Mill's Harm Principle:
the sole purpose of the law should be to stop people from harming others and that should people want to participate in victimless crimes (gambling, drugs, prostitution) then they should not be encroached in doing so. [Do anything you want so long as it harms no one else] "That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others" the hard question is what is harm? (there is a difference between being offended and being harmed)
Character Traits (Morals)
the tendency to act a certain way for the right reason
Cyberbullying
use of the internet or phone system to inflict psychological harm
According to Aristotle
virtues come as a whole package, not just bits and pieces, or being a different man in different settings still widely debated if you can be virtuous in certain parts of your life, but Aristotle would say no
Internet Addiction
we were born into the cusp of the internet people connected all the time maybe too much affects on physical life started in 1995 debate over addiction and compulsion disorder some people spend 40-80 hours/ week on the internet with individual sessions lasting up to 20 hours Ex. Andrew Doan, MD, PhD battled his own addiction Legislation is South Korea bans online gaming for anyone under the age of 16 from the hours 10p-6a