Chapter Two - Ethical systems

Abstract

In the physical world, we accept that civil society is organized around principles of what can and should be done and what cannot or should not occur. Various theoretical frameworks for ethical systems of include the deontological justice as fairness, utilitarianism, existentialism, hedonism, and egoism. The dominant ethical structures in the physical world and digital environments can and do differ. In civil society, we are expected to act in an orderly and “civilized” way—a way that allows us to all pursue our lives with minimal interference. We generally know what is expected from us and toward each other, and we understand the basic repercussions and enforcement options for violations in the physical world. When a user joins a digital environment—that is, when a user downloads software, establishes an account, clicks through and agrees to the EULA, the terms of service, and a code of conduct—and then the user walks through the door, they have agreed to a new set of rules that governs their behavior (or purports to; enforcement is a different story), what they have rights to, and how violations are treated. These are generally laid out by the developer/publisher of the software, often to protect the publisher’s liability in the real world. As digital communal spaces where users interact, there are concepts of what is right and wrong, good and bad. Initially, these are set by the user rules, but layered on top is the extent (or lack thereof) of enforcement of those rules, the particular goals or narrative of a given digital space, and the self-selection of the users who find their way there. As the importance of digital environments became increasingly apparent, the public debated whether companies controlling these environments have a responsibility to enforce ethical standards applicable in the physical world and whether regulations should require they do so.