Expert Answer :JUSTICE ARGUMENT

  

Solved by verified expert:For JUSTICE ARGUMENTRead the article: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/amazon…You are to write a Justice argument in full sentences and paragraphs, that applies JUSTICE to the case offered, and fully follows the JUSTICE theory outline.Use the JUSTICE ARGUMENT OUTLINE as precisely as possible, the argument should be around one page.The argument must be in full sentences and paragraphs: no numbering, no bullets and no one or two sentence paragraphs.This assignment should be the ARGUMENT section and only the ARGUMENT. You should not write INTRO or CASE DETAILS or a summary. I know the case details. This is an exercise to practice writing JUSTICE arguments.OUTLINE FOR JUSTICE ARGUMENT.RULE OF THUMB for step 4: When applying Justice, if possible, state differences, do not state equalities. There are logical problems with equalities (universal instantiation problem): when you say “all should” this could mean none should, better to stress differences if you can.1. Define JUSTICE: Justice demands that we treat equals equally and unequals unequally. (just copy/paste the definition)2. Give a general statement of the unfairness (or fairness) of the case. Best language to use:X is being treated the same as YorX is being treated differently from Y3. Give some idea of who is doing the distribution of judgment in the case. (Be careful, a party being compared in the case cannot be the one doing the comparing.)4. State whether equals should be treated equally or whether unequals should be treated unequally. Best language to use:X should be treated the same as YorX should be treated differently from Y5. Give your criteria (can be more than one) for why equals should be treated equally or why unequals should be treated unequally.6. Explain how your criteria fit.7. COUNTERARGUMENT: Give an argument for the other side that people would likely or have proposed.8. Explain why your comparison fits better, and why it is ethically better.Attached is the sample justice argument.
justice_.pdf

sample_justice_argument__1_.pdf

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Expert Answer :JUSTICE ARGUMENT
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

Unformatted Attachment Preview

JUSTICE
7 JUSTICE CRITERIA…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..4
OUTLINE FOR JUSTICE ARGUMENT…………………………………………………………………………………………………4
We all understand the language of justice and fairness, but philosophers have given a
rather precise formulation of justice. Justice theory does not refer to law enforcement or
legal issues. Legal issues can often be adjudicated using justice theory, but justice
theory is broader.
JUSTICE is, in the end, about treating people, things or processes the same or
differently. But in applying criteria in computer ethics, the relevant differences are not
usually directly about people. Applying justice theory is very useful when someone is
assuming or stating that something about a case makes things equal or that something
makes things different. The something is often not actually referring to people but to
important other considerations. Think of applying Justice as trying to compare apples
and oranges, sometimes you need to see the important difference between the apple
and the orange, and sometimes you need to pay attention to the fact that they are both
the same: just fruit.
EXAMPLES:
• cell phones versus laptops
• speaking in public versus posting on Facebook
• owning software versus owning hardware
Often, it is the medium of technology that can make the big difference and someone is
failing to recognize this.
EXAMPLE (where people come in more directly, but the emphasis should be on
actions):
According to recently proposed laws, all sex offenders would be denied social
networking access. But our laws usually label an 18 year old having sex with his 17
year old girlfriend the same as a 50 year old man raping a 2 year old. We want to
say their behavior should be treated differently, not the same.
COMPARING PEOPLE:
Ask yourself, is there something inherent about the people in this case that is being
equated or differentiated? Is there something about these people such as their race,
religion, ethnicity, country of origin, hair color, sexual orientation, age, eye color,
or name that is being equated or differentiated? If the case is not about these or other
definitive factors about people, then do not compare people, the case is instead
about objects, behaviors, or processes. So in the example about sex offenders, we
have two comparisons to address, different age groups are being equated, but in this
case, the age groups matter, so wrong groups of people are being equated, but more
importantly, two different behaviors would be wrongly equated: older teens having mutual
sex is not the same behavior as pedophiles abusing children.
1
These kinds of considerations where things are wrongly equated or differentiated makes
justice theory very useful. Really discussing in detail the way two things or processes are
being wrongly equated or wrongly differentiated can be a very useful ethical approach.
Sometimes we mistakenly lump tech considerations together when we should not. Or we
want to see the latest innovation as somehow different from the way the world was
before, when it really should be recognized as similar.
Often, what we assume to be a rights issue is instead a justice issue. Students often
think of discrimination as a rights issue, but rights theory does discriminate, it must
discriminate, at the very least, between the rights of children and the rights of adults.
Sometimes special rights apply to special persons, such as positive rights of redress or
for special needs. Rights is not accurately described as equal. If you want to make
claims of equality or special needs, etc., then use justice theory.
The general definition of justice is:
JUSTICE: treat equals equally, unequals unequally
Notice how this definition does not specify people, it merely states that if we are fair, we
treat whatever as equal when it should be seen as equal, and different when it should be
seen as different. The word should is the important term here. Should tells us we are
making a claim about ethics, specifically, about what is fair.
There is a traditional division between three forms of justice: compensatory, retributive,
and distributive. You should know this division for exams, but in applying justice to
cases, just use distribution, do not specify compensation or retribution. Why?
Simply, you distribute compensation, you distribute punishment.
3 FORMS OF JUSTICE
1. COMPENSATORY-fair compensation for loss due to wrong action of others.
2. RETRIBUTIVE-fair punishment or penalties for wrong-doers
3. DISTRIBUTIVE-fairly distribute social & economic benefits and burdens
This last one, DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE,(distribute benefits and burdens equally to equals
and unequally to unequals) is very important to political philosophy and to ethics in business
and the professions. The definition of distributive justice, means that whatever your criteria for
distribution is, you should use that criteria evenly.
Justice Theory was systematically treated in Ancient Greece by the philosopher Aristotle. He
divides justice criteria according to the forms of government that exemplify that distributive
criteria.
Here are the definitions and characteristic political states for Aristotle’s forms of distributive
justice. Notice how these forms of justice do indeed often disagree.
WHEN DISCUSSING JUSTICE, DO NOT MENTION THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
The listings of forms of government is just to give you a sense of how Aristotle
formulated the different criteria of justice. Do not mention the forms of government in
your case analyses.
2
1. EGALITARIAN- there are no relevant differences
Distribute benefits and burdens equally
This form often applies when you are looking at cases where race and religion are factored
into how people are treated, such as cases of discrimination, and you think those
race/religion, etc. factors should not have been considered. In other words, there was unfair
treatment because everyone should have been treated equally and they were not.
Using Egalitarianism is tricky. We are very often using the six other criteria to show things
should have been treated the same. That sounds like egalitarianism, since it is about
treating things the same. Best to reserve egalitarianism for when you want to emphasize that
the case has nothing to do with merit, nor with any of the other 6 criteria. The example of
race or religious discrimination is just such an example. We want to stress that there should
be no relevant differences of race or religion. Merit has nothing to do with this decision.
2. ARISTOCRACY-Monarchies, etc.
Distribute benefits according to merit. School admissions, salaries of CEOs could be seen
as merit. The idea of merit is that something should be treated differently because it
deserves a difference. But you can earn punishment too. Merit is the catchall, when no other
criteria apply, merit applies. It just means something about what you are comparing
shows us why there should be sameness or difference. You then explain what that
difference is. Merit is the preferred criterion, it will allow you to focus on the difference
or sameness of the tech itself rather than reaching for some other criteria.
Again, merit does not have to have positive connotation, it can signal a bad difference. It all
depends on the case. Merit does not have to be about people. We say, for example, This
situation merits special attention. This is perfectly correct English, and it is not referring to
people.
3. CAPITALIST
1. distribute benefits and burdens according to WORK EFFORT
Those who work hardest deserve more
2. distribute benefits and burdens according to PRODUCTIVITY
We all know co-workers who work hard but get very little done. They are just too slow,
etc. Productivity would say we should count how much they get done, not how hard they
work.
3. distribute benefits and burdens according to MARKET DEMANDS
You have to explain what the market demands.
4. SOCIALIST-socialism can include work effort &/or productivity
1. distribute benefits according to NEED
2. distribute burdens according to ABILITY
Be cautious in using needs/ability, that you are not too closely mirroring utilitarianism.
In this course, merit, productivity, work effort, & market demands are usually
important.
MERIT is the catchall you should use.. In computer ethics, the things compared
are very often technical variations or environmental factors related to tech use, etc.
3
In terms of criteria related to technical variations, an example would be government
demands for backdoors. Problems with those demands often involve issues of system
integrity versus pieces of code. Elements of the technology itself need to be defined,
described, and compared, so if you used other criteria, the other criteria would not
suffice. In terms of environmental factors of tech use: think of playing a computer
game versus playing Pokemon GO. How, where, and when become important
distinguishing criteria.
But if you are having difficulties framing your argument around the tech itself, then try
framing your argument by one or more of Aristotle’s criteria other than merit.
7 JUSTICE CRITERIA
7 criteria as standards of Distribution:
1. there are no relevant differences (specify EGALITARIANISM) Distribute benefits
and burdens EQUALLY
2. distribute benefits and burdens according to MERIT
3. distribute benefits and burdens according to WORK EFFORT
4. distribute benefits and burdens according to PRODUCTIVITY
5. distribute benefits and burdens according to MARKET DEMANDS
6. distribute benefits according to NEED
7. distribute burdens according to ABILITY.
You must give arguments for both sides if you are looking at only one ethical
theory.
OUTLINE FOR JUSTICE ARGUMENT.
RULE OF THUMB for step 4: When applying Justice, if possible, state differences, do not state
equalities. There are logical problems with equalities (universal instantiation problem): when you say
“all should” this could mean none should, better to stress differences if you can.
1.Define JUSTICE: Justice demands that we treat equals equally and unequals
unequally. (just copy/paste the definition)
2. Give a general statement of the unfairness (or fairness) of the case. Best language to
use:
X is being treated the same as Y
or
X is being treated differently from Y
3. Give some idea of who is doing the distribution of judgment in the case. (Be careful, a
party being compared in the case cannot be the one doing the comparing.)
4. State whether equals should be treated equally or whether unequals should be treated
unequally. Best language to use:
X should be treated the same as Y
or
X should be treated differently from Y
4
5. Give your criteria (can be more than one) for why equals should be treated equally or
why unequals should be treated unequally.
6. Explain how your criteria fit.
7. COUNTERARGUMENT: Give an argument for the other side that people would likely
or have proposed.
8. Explain why your comparison fits better, and why it is ethically better.
5
Justice Argument:
Justice demands that we treat equals equally and unequals unequally. The Lodi
School District in California attempted to contract a social media policy with their
students. This contract allows authority for the school district to regulate offcampus activity including the use of personal social media pages. This is unfair
because personal social media pages are not an official representation of school
activity. The Lodi School District unfairly compared the students’ personal
behavior outside of school to that behavior when representing the school. Those
who are judging this case would be anyone who supports justice. Everyone
should be judging this case.
Unequals should be treated unequally. Justice demands that we treat equals
equally and unequals unequally to fairly distribute social and economic benefits
and burdens. The situation that needs to be examined is the behavior and
communication made by students. The criteria which applies to this situation is
that of distributing the burden according to merit. The behavior a student displays
on their personal time is different (unequal) than that of any behavior made by
that student when representing their school and should be seen as
different. Although the student may not be on school grounds when at “away”
events, they are indeed representing a school related organization and should
behave and communicate in a manner that is consistent with the school rules,
philosophy, and expectations. Once that student leaves and is no longer a
representative of the school, the manner in which he/she behaves should no
longer be a concern of the school. For example, if a teenage boy was on the high
school golf team, he’d be expected to be on his best behavior, follow all the
course guidelines, as well as the team’s rules and expectations because not only
was he a guest of the golf course, but also a representative of his high school.
But if that same teenage boy went to the same golf course with his dad, uncle,
and cousin, he may goof off a bit, swear, and let off some energy while bonding
with his family and the school should have no concern with his behavior.
A likely counterargument could be in an extreme case such as cyberbullying
when the effects of off-campus cyberbullying may hinder one’s ability to learn
while at school. An intervention may be permitted, if the action of off-campus
behavior has a direct impact on a student’s ability to gain an education. For
example, if a student is being exploited on another student’s personal Facebook
page for being overweight and being called horrific names on where other
students can see then this can affect social interactions at school and disrupt the
learning environment. The student may feel extremely emotionally saddened,
especially if other students at school are laughing at him/her on campus over the
specific matter. Even though it may not have happened at school, it can become
a problem on campus and the problem will have to resolve at the root which may
include disciplinary action for the bullying that was posted on a student’s
personal page.
Extracurricular physical ‘away’ events should not be treated the same as
personal pages on social media, and therefore student’s personal pages are not
regulated by the school district. This is ethically better because the school has no
authority over off-campus activities that are unrelated to school. Even if the
school knew the student’s behavior outside of school, they shouldn’t be
concerned because the students rarely act the same way at school as they do
when they are at home. Although social media may be a concern for the school,
it is not controlled by the school. Understanding that not all of the student’s life
and behavior is up for strict guidelines and monitoring of the school is ethical
because when they are not representing the school, the students should not be a
concern of the school.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Order your essay today and save 30% with the discount code ESSAYSHELP