INVITATION TO CYBERSECURITY 262 There are many ways to view the ethical dimensions of any situation. Performing an ethical analysis such as this is just as much art as science—honest, wise, and well-meaning people may highlight different details and come to different ethical conclusions. We walked through one series of analyses for a single ethical dilemma that people may or may not find convincing. Importantly, our analysis can be debated on its merits, but there is still a fundamental weakness in this type of ethical analysis. Because the tally was three to one we concluded that it would be unethical for Bob not to tell the president that he listened to the call. However, a strict utilitarian might still disagree with this stance, even though he is outnumbered. This shows that considering multiple viewpoints is not an algorithm that leads to foolproof conclusions. It cannot resolve all disputes. In the end, a person’s worldview is the trump card that determines the final verdict. A worldview is a person’s beliefs about ultimate reality. A person’s worldview answers life’s biggest questions such as, “Why are we here?” and, “What matters most in life?” The answers to these questions determine values, and values are what gives weight to different ethical factors. A worldview is also where personal religious beliefs fit into the moral calculus. Religious convictions help individuals determine right from wrong and choose to do what is right. Each of the four ethical paradigms seeks to determine what is best for Bob, the president, and society through rational argument, but they, like religion, are ultimately based on unprovable presuppositions about the transcendent nature of reality. Each must be accepted by faith. Their goal is human and societal flourishing, but they do not all agree on what that means nor on how to achieve it. In the end, even if he is unable to persuade others, each individual must cast his lot according to his worldview and live with the consequences of his actions. There is also a danger in an academic treatment of ethics in a textbook such as this. The reader may be tempted to compartmentalize ethics and view it as an emergency toolkit that can be kept on the shelf until it is needed. But even in the field of cybersecurity where ethical grey areas are relatively common, most days on the job cybersecurity professionals will not be faced with thorny ethical dilemmas. What is more likely is that they will be regularly faced with smaller ethical decisions where they know the right thing to do. It is in these seemingly low stakes and maybe even presumed “victimless” situations where they will be tempted to compromise. Ethics is not something that can be compartmentalized; it is not an emergency toolkit. Ethical convictions are lived out every day. Cybersecurity professionals must possess the character to do the right thing every time. If they are faithful in the little things, they will be faithful in the big things when they do arise. The next section elaborates on why this is important for society.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=