Ethics in the Software Development Process: from Codes of Conduct to Ethical Deliberation

Software systems play an ever more important role in our lives and software engineers and their companies find themselves in a position where they are held responsible for ethical issues that may arise. In this paper, we try to disentangle ethical considerations that can be performed at the level of the software engineer from those that belong in the wider domain of business ethics. The handling of ethical problems that fall into the responsibility of the engineer has traditionally been addressed by the publication of Codes of Ethics and Conduct. We argue that these Codes are barely able to provide normative orientation in software development. The main contribution of this paper is, thus, to analyze the normative features of Codes of Ethics in software engineering and to explicate how their value-based approach might prevent their usefulness from a normative perspective. Codes of Conduct cannot replace ethical deliberation because they do not and cannot offer guidance because of their underdetermined nature. This lack of orientation, we argue, triggers reactive behavior such as “cherry-picking,” “risk of indifference,” “ex-post orientation,” and the “desire to rely on gut feeling.” In the light of this, we propose to implement ethical deliberation within software development teams as a way out.

[1]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[2]  J. Rawls,et al.  A Theory of Justice , 1971, Princeton Readings in Political Thought.

[3]  Allan Gibbard,et al.  Wise choices, apt feelings : a theory of normative judgment , 1992 .

[4]  Raymond R. Bond,et al.  Ethical by Design: A Manifesto , 2017, ECCE.

[5]  Thilo Hagendorff,et al.  The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines , 2019, Minds and Machines.

[6]  Fátima Poza-Vilches,et al.  A Systematic Review of the Use of Agile Methodologies in Education to Foster Sustainability Competencies , 2019, Sustainability.

[7]  David G. Hendry,et al.  Value Sensitive Design , 2019 .

[8]  C. Sunstein Some Effects of Moral Indignation on Law , 2009 .

[9]  Kieran Conboy,et al.  Obstacles to decision making in Agile software development teams , 2012, J. Syst. Softw..

[10]  Alan Borning,et al.  Value Sensitive Design: Theory and Methods , 2002 .

[11]  Madhulika Srikumar,et al.  Principled Artificial Intelligence: Mapping Consensus in Ethical and Rights-Based Approaches to Principles for AI , 2020, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[12]  S. Noble Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism , 2018 .

[13]  Tony Doyle,et al.  Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy , 2017, Inf. Soc..

[14]  Peter-Paul Verbeek,et al.  Moralizing Technology: Understanding and Designing the Morality of Things , 2011 .

[15]  J. Nida-Rümelin Eine Theorie praktischer Vernunft , 2020 .

[16]  L. Winner Autonomous Technology: Technics-out-of-Control as a Theme in Political Thought , 1977 .

[17]  L. Floridi,et al.  A Unified Framework of Five Principles for AI in Society , 2019, Issue 1.

[18]  W. D. Ross,et al.  The Right and the Good , 1930 .

[19]  J. Demarco Coherence and applied ethics. , 1997, Journal of applied philosophy.

[20]  Sven Ove Hansson,et al.  The case for ethical technology assessment (eTA) , 2006 .

[21]  R. Wedgwood Rationality as a Virtue , 2014 .

[22]  Sami Haddadin,et al.  An embedded ethics approach for AI development , 2020, Nature Machine Intelligence.

[23]  Yi Zeng,et al.  Linking Artificial Intelligence Principles , 2018, SafeAI@AAAI.

[24]  N. Palladino,et al.  The role of the epistemic communities in the 'constitutionalization' of the Internet Governance: the case of the EU High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence. , 2020 .

[25]  Alexandros André Chaaraoui,et al.  Visual privacy protection methods: A survey , 2015, Expert Syst. Appl..

[26]  Luciano Floridi,et al.  The Logic of Information , 2019 .

[27]  L. Floridi,et al.  The Ethics of Information , 2013, Dialogue.

[28]  Muel Kaptein,et al.  The Effectiveness of Business Codes: A Critical Examination of Existing Studies and the Development of an Integrated Research Model , 2007 .

[29]  Jess Whittlestone,et al.  The Role and Limits of Principles in AI Ethics: Towards a Focus on Tensions , 2019, AIES.

[30]  Geoffrey P. Goodwin,et al.  Does Incidental Disgust Amplify Moral Judgment? A Meta-Analytic Review of Experimental Evidence , 2015, Perspectives on Psychological Science.

[31]  Philip A.E. Brey,et al.  Anticipatory Ethics for Emerging Technologies , 2012, NanoEthics.

[32]  Tsjalling Swierstra,et al.  Ethics on the Laboratory Floor , 2013 .

[33]  Michael Davis,et al.  Thinking Like an Engineer: Studies in the Ethics of a Profession , 1998 .

[34]  George H. Mead Scientific Method and the Moral Sciences , 1923, The International Journal of Ethics.

[35]  Ken H. Judy Agile Principles and Ethical Conduct , 2009 .

[36]  Bernard Hoose,et al.  The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning , 1991 .

[37]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Heuristic decision making. , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[38]  Albert R. Jonsen,et al.  The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning , 1988 .

[39]  Z. Kunda,et al.  The case for motivated reasoning. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[40]  Shannon Vallor Technology and the Virtues: A Philosophical Guide to a Future Worth Wanting , 2016 .

[41]  Keith W. Miller,et al.  ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct , 2018 .

[42]  Emerson R. Murphy-Hill,et al.  Does ACM’s code of ethics change ethical decision making in software development? , 2018, ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE.

[43]  H. Lillehammer The Nature and Ethics of Indifference , 2017 .

[44]  Sarah Spiekermann,et al.  Ethical IT Innovation - A Value-Based System Design Approach , 2015 .

[45]  R. Wedgwood The Value of Rationality , 2017, Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung.

[46]  Yoel Inbar,et al.  On Disgust and Moral Judgment , 2011 .

[47]  Cathy O'Neil,et al.  Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy , 2016, Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers.

[48]  Peter P.C.C. Verbeek Artifacts and Attachment: A Post-Script Philosophy of Mediation , 2005 .

[49]  Virginia E. Eubanks Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor , 2018 .

[50]  Hannah Lebovits Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor , 2018, Public Integrity.

[51]  J. Moor What Is Computer Ethics?* , 1985, The Ethics of Information Technologies.

[52]  Marcello Ienca,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: the global landscape of ethics guidelines , 2019, ArXiv.

[53]  J. Dewey Human Nature and Conduct , 1921 .

[54]  A. Rip Pervasive Normativity and Emerging Technologies , 2013 .

[55]  M. Depaul Two Conceptions of Coherence Methods in Ethics , 1987 .

[56]  A. Gibbard,et al.  Wise Choices, Apt Feelings: A Theory of Normative Judgement. , 1991 .

[57]  T. Abel,et al.  Mind, Self, and Society , 1934 .

[58]  Kent L. Beck,et al.  Extreme programming explained - embrace change , 1990 .

[59]  L. Floridi © 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. Information ethics: On the philosophical foundation of computer ethics ⋆ , 2022 .

[60]  D. Stemerding,et al.  Anticipating the Interaction between Technology and Morality: A Scenario Study of Experimenting with Humans in Bionanotechnology , 2010 .

[61]  Mark S. Schwartz,et al.  The Nature of the Relationship between Corporate Codes of Ethics and Behaviour , 2001 .

[62]  Alex Kessler,et al.  Thinking Like an Engineer , 2015 .

[63]  D. Hausman Preference, Value, Choice, and Welfare , 2011 .

[64]  Anna Jobin,et al.  The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines , 2019, Nature Machine Intelligence.

[65]  Luciano Floridi,et al.  From What to How: An Initial Review of Publicly Available AI Ethics Tools, Methods and Research to Translate Principles into Practices , 2019, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[66]  M. Lodge,et al.  The Rationalizing Voter , 2013 .