Deontological Ethics

Deontological Ethics in Location-based Social Media There are so many location aware applications on my “smart” phone; I do not know how I could have lived without these features. There are applications that tell me where is the closes gym that I am a member of. There are applications that give me information on the weather of the current city. There are even applications that will locate the closest “driver” to taxi me wherever I want to go. And of course, all these can be shared on facebook or various other social networking sites. With the narrowing gap of our online presence and real life, these bring on various questions on the data that we provide and who can see. As with all technology issues in the current age, privacy is a huge hurdle to go through. The biggest difference between deontological ethics and consequential ethics is that while consequential ethics justify morality with the end result, deontological questions the morality of actions that lead to the result. Whether the end result is moral or not, if the actions taken is immoral, the person who perform that action is immoral. In regards to Kantian ethics, location-based social media providers will have to justify their means of delivering the service. As a service provider, it will be their duty to uphold the service and have adequate privacy protection. While a business’ goal is to stain itself, they still have a duty to uphold their services to the subscribers. If the providers have a decision to upgrade inadequate protection software or save a large sum of money, it will be in their inclination to save the money and raise their bottom line, however, it will not be dutiful. Both scenarios could have consequences that are good or bad but as far as deontological ethics goes, their actions will be immoral if their duty to the subscribers is not met. I believe the most widespread deontological issue in technology in general is patents. If the process is what justifies the