TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: More ethics... From:Peter <pnewman1 -at- home -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:35:29 -0400
Bruce Byfield wrote:
> Here's my reasoning: stealing is wrong because it harms other people. If
> someone steals $1000 from an unemployed person, you hurt them
> considerably. If you steal $1000 from Microsoft, which apparently banks
> a billion dollars per month, the company is not substantially hurt.
> Legally, the difference in harm doesn't matter, and perhaps shouldn't;
> to insist that it should would be to declare open season on large
> corporations. And, if you assume, as I tend to, that stealing has a
> harmful effect on the thief, the effect on the thief isn't affected by
> whom the victim is. But if the degree of harm is the criterion for
> judging the seriousness of the act, then stealing from the unemployed
> person is the greater crime in ethical terms.
> Perhaps, however, there may be other reasons for viewing theft as wrong,
> in which case the argument fails. Also, your position might depend on
> where you are on Kohlberg's morality scale. For example, if you don't
> steal because you are afraid of getting caught, or because you've been
> told it's wrong, you're not likely to agree with this reasoning.
If I understand you correctly, you are saying morally stealing can be
OK, even though legally it is wrong.
Suppose the entity you seal from only has one million per month?
five hundred thousand?
$1,000?
$10
The claim of Robin Hood may make you feel romantic, but I am not
impressed. You agree that it is legally wrong, but you would set up a
moral standard based upon your individual perception of victim harm. It
is a matter of simple morality. I have no right to appropriate any of
your property without your consent. Not even a towel from your hotel.
Logical conclusion from you argument:
It is morally OK for me to steal any of your work, since I would not
have bought it anyway. The folks I would sell it to as my work, do not
know you and therefore would not have paid you. Therefore you are not
harmed by my stealing.
Does this really sit right with you?
--
Peter
Mailto:peternew -at- optonline -dot- net
Adapting old programs to fit new machines
usually means adapting new machines to
behave like old ones.
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and
three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe. http://ieeepcs.org/2001/
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
