The DICT Development Group

Search for:
Search type:

Database copyright information
Server information

4 definitions found
 for ethics
From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 :

  Ethics \Eth"ics\ ([e^]th"[i^]ks), n. [Cf. F. ['e]thique. See
     The science of human duty; the body of rules of duty drawn
     from this science; a particular system of principles and
     rules concerting duty, whether true or false; rules of
     practice in respect to a single class of human actions; as,
     political or social ethics; medical ethics.
     [1913 Webster]
           The completeness and consistency of its morality is the
           peculiar praise of the ethics which the Bible has
           taught.                                  --I. Taylor.
     [1913 Webster]

From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) :

      n 1: motivation based on ideas of right and wrong [syn: ethical
           motive, ethics, morals, morality]
      2: the philosophical study of moral values and rules [syn:
         ethics, moral philosophy]

From Moby Thesaurus II by Grady Ward, 1.0 :

  54 Moby Thesaurus words for "ethics":
     aesthetics, allegiance, assigned task, axiology, bounden duty,
     burden, business, call of duty, casuistry, charge, commitment,
     cosmology, dedication, deference, devoir, devotion,
     duties and responsibilities, duty, epistemology, fealty,
     first philosophy, gnosiology, homage, imperative, line of duty,
     logic, loyalty, mental philosophy, metaphysics, mission,
     moral philosophy, must, obligation, ontology, onus, ought,
     phenomenology, philosophastry, philosophic doctrine,
     philosophic system, philosophic theory, philosophical inquiry,
     philosophical speculation, philosophy, place, respect,
     school of philosophy, school of thought, science of being,
     self-imposed duty, sophistry, theory of beauty,
     theory of knowledge, value theory

From The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (30 December 2018) :

  computer ethics
      Ethics is the field of study that is concerned
     with questions of value, that is, judgments about what human
     behaviour is "good" or "bad".  Ethical judgments are no
     different in the area of computing from those in any other
     area.  Computers raise problems of privacy, ownership, theft,
     and power, to name but a few.
     Computer ethics can be grounded in one of four basic
     world-views: Idealism, Realism, Pragmatism, or Existentialism.
     Idealists believe that reality is basically ideas and that
     ethics therefore involves conforming to ideals.  Realists
     believe that reality is basically nature and that ethics
     therefore involves acting according to what is natural.
     Pragmatists believe that reality is not fixed but is in
     process and that ethics therefore is practical (that is,
     concerned with what will produce socially-desired results).
     Existentialists believe reality is self-defined and that
     ethics therefore is individual (that is, concerned only with
     one's own conscience).  Idealism and Realism can be considered
     ABSOLUTIST worldviews because they are based on something
     fixed (that is, ideas or nature, respectively).  Pragmatism
     and Existentialism can be considered RELATIVIST worldviews
     because they are based or something relational (that is,
     society or the individual, respectively).
     Thus ethical judgments will vary, depending on the judge's
     world-view.  Some examples:
     First consider theft.  Suppose a university's computer is used
     for sending an e-mail message to a friend or for conducting a
     full-blown private business (billing, payroll, inventory,
     etc.).  The absolutist would say that both activities are
     unethical (while recognising a difference in the amount of
     wrong being done).  A relativist might say that the latter
     activities were wrong because they tied up too much memory and
     slowed down the machine, but the e-mail message wasn't wrong
     because it had no significant effect on operations.
     Next consider privacy.  An instructor uses her account to
     acquire the cumulative grade point average of a student who is
     in a class which she instructs.  She obtained the password for
     this restricted information from someone in the Records Office
     who erroneously thought that she was the student's advisor.
     The absolutist would probably say that the instructor acted
     wrongly, since the only person who is entitled to this
     information is the student and his or her advisor.  The
     relativist would probably ask why the instructor wanted the
     information.  If she replied that she wanted it to be sure
     that her grading of the student was consistent with the
     student's overall academic performance record, the relativist
     might agree that such use was acceptable.
     Finally, consider power.  At a particular university, if a
     professor wants a computer account, all she or he need do is
     request one but a student must obtain faculty sponsorship in
     order to receive an account.  An absolutist (because of a
     proclivity for hierarchical thinking) might not have a problem
     with this divergence in procedure.  A relativist, on the other
     hand, might question what makes the two situations essentially
     different (e.g. are faculty assumed to have more need for
     computers than students?  Are students more likely to cause
     problems than faculty?  Is this a hold-over from the days of
     "in loco parentis"?).
     "Philosophical Bases of Computer Ethics", Professor Robert
     http://nd.edu/~rbarger/metaethics.html)">N. Barger (http://nd.edu/~rbarger/metaethics.html).
     Usenet newsgroups: news:bit.listserv.ethics-l,

Contact=webmaster@dict.org Specification=RFC 2229