1. Thou shalt not use a computer to harm other people.
2. Thou shalt not interfere with other people's computer work.
3. Thou shalt not snoop around in other people's files.
4. Thou shalt not use a computer to steal.
5. Thou shalt not use a computer to bear false witness.
6. Thou shalt not use or copy software for which you have not paid.
7. Thou shalt not use other people's computer resources without authorization.
8. Thou shalt not appropriate other people's intellectual output.
9. Thou shalt think about the social consequences of the program you write.
10. Thou shalt use a computer in ways that show consideration and respect.
Three Precepts and Ethical Theories
Thou shalt use a computer in ways that show consideration and respect.
The above precept is an example of categorical imperative. It is morally good in itself.
As Kant presented, "Act so that in your own person as well as in the person of every other you are treating
mankind also as an end, never merely as a means."
Treating others with consideration and respect is a good end.
Thou shalt not use a computer to steal.
An ethical egoist justifies the means by the end. The above precept may be analyzed in its seemingly
particular application.
The tale of Robin Hood shows that some people view stealing as morally good bacause of motives.
An egoist may justify that violating the above precept would not necessarily be wrong. That is, if the
doer only steals to satisfy his desires.
Thou shalt not use a computer to harm other people.
In my discussion of this commandment in class I usually ask my students, "Does this mean, you shall never
throw the monitor, or the keyboard, or the system unit to other people?"
Funny question, but I wanted my students to discern that harming one is not only through physically hurting
him.
Physical injury is not the only harm one can inflict to others. There is what we call emotional pain.
The Commandment 1 is in fact a universal, constant and consistent standard.
An ethical absolutist considers the prevalent child pornography morally
wrong as how he views child abuse. He will never accept nor consider the justification: Child pornography doesn't really
harm a child. In time, any emotional and psychological disturbances shall heal themselves.
