Theory Building Exercise: Rights Theory
William J. Frey Center for Ethics in the
Professions, University of Puerto Rico - Mayaguez)
Chuck Huff (St. Olaf College)
Preliminary Draft distributed at APPE, 2005 in
San Antonio, TX
This module uses materials being prepared for
Good Computing: A Virtue Approach to Computer Ethics, to set up an
exercise in which students justify rights claims in a given
professional area or discipline and then work to contextualize
these rights claims in everyday practice. This approach to rights
justification is based on the well founded positions that rights
and duties are correlative. It has been formulated to be compatible
with a variety of deontological approaches including social
contract theory, duty theory, rights theory, natural law,
etc.
This approach to rights has been developed in
detail by Henry Shue in Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and
U.S. Foreign Policy, 2nd edition, Princeton, 1980 and Thomas
Donaldson, The Ethics of International Business, Oxford, 1989. This
exercise has been used in computer and engineering ethics classes
at the University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez from 2002 on to the
present. It is being incorporated into the textbook, Good
Computing: A Virtue Approach to Computer Ethics by Chuck Huff,
William Frey, and Jose Cruz.
- Listen to the preliminary
lecture on rights theory. Notice that it focuses on the correlativity of
rights and duties. (An outline of the key points of this lecture is
given below.)
- You will be divided into small
groups of 4 or 5. Each group will be assigned a right claim pertinent to a
given professional area. (You also have the option of choosing your own right claim.) Sample rights claims used in past include
property, free consent, freedom of conscience, free speech, due
process, privacy. More problematic claims can be added to provide a chance to reflect on the fact that not every
right claim satisfies the justification framework in this
module.
- Your group will complete the justification
framework by filling in the table presented below. (See table
working out the right claim of due process below.)
- Each group will prepare a brief presentation on its right claim that it will present to the class. This presentation will center on displaying and unpacking the right table the group has prepared. Other students are encouraged to ask questions and formulate
objections.
- Each groups should copy its table and distribute it to the other groups in class.
In this way, you will jointly prepare a rights manual for use in
decision-making exercises.
- El derecho para actuar de acuerdo a la conciencia etica y rechazar trabajos en los cuales exista una variacion de opinones morales.
- El derecho de expresar juicio profesional, y hacer pronunciamientos publicos que sean consistentes con restricciones corporativas sobre la informacion propietaria.
- El derecho a la lealtad corporativa y la libertad de que sea hecho un chivo expiatorio para catastrofes naturales, ineptitud de administracion u otras fuerzas mas alla del control del ingeniero.
- El derecho a buscar el mejoramiento personal mediante estudios postgraduados y envolverse en asociaciones profesionales.
- .El derecho a participar en actividades de partidos politicos fuera de las horas de trabajo.
- El derecho a solicitar posiciones superiores con otras companias sin que la companis en la que trabaje tome represalias contra el ingeniero.
- El derecho al debido proceso de ley y la libertad de que se le apliquen penalidades arbitrarias o despidos.
- El derecho a apelar por revision ante una asociacion profesional, ombudsman o arbitro independiente.
- El derecho a la privacidad personal.
- These rights are taken from Etica en la Practica Profesional de la Ingenieria by Wilfredo Munoz Roman published in 1998 by the Colegio de Ingenieros y Agrimensores de Puerto Rico and Universidad Politecnica de Puerto Rico
- Kantian formalism bases respect on the human
individual’s intrinsic value as an autonomous being. Using this as
a point of departure, we can develop a method for identifying,
spelling out, and justifying the rights and duties that go with
professional computing. This framework can be summarized in four
general propositions:
- 1. Definition: A right is an essential
capacity of action that others are obliged to recognize and
respect. This definition follows from autonomy.
Autonomy can be broken down into a series of specific capacities.
Rights claims arise when we identify these capacities and take
social action to protect them. Rights are inviolable and cannot be
overridden even when overriding would bring about substantial
public utility.
- 2. All rights claims must satisfy three
requirements. They must be (1) essential to the autonomy of
individuals and (2) vulnerable so that they require special
recognition and protection (on the part of both individuals and
society). Moreover, the burden of recognizing and respecting a
claim as a right must not deprive others of something essential. In
other words, it must be (3) feasible for both individuals and
social groups to recognize and respect legitimate rights
claims.
- 3. Definition: A duty is a rule or principle
requiring that we both recognize and respect the legitimate rights
claims of others. Duties attendant on a given right fall into three
general forms: (a) duties not to deprive, (b) duties to prevent deprivation, and (c) duties to aid the deprived.
- 4. Rights and duties are correlative; for
every right there is a correlative series of duties to recognize
and respect that right.
- These four summary points together form a system of professional and occupational rights and
correlative duties.
- Essential: To say that a right is essential to autonomy is to
say that it highlights a capacity whose exercise is necessary to
the general exercise of autonomy. For example, autonomy is based on
certain knowledge skills. Hence, we have a right to an education to
develop the knowledge required by autonomy, or we have a right to
the knowledge that produces informed consent. In general, rights
are devices for recognizing certain capacities as essential to
autonomy and respecting individuals in their exercise of these
capacities.
- Vulnerable: The exercise of the capacity protected under the
right needs protection. Individuals may interfere with us in our
attempt to exercise our rights. Groups, corporations, and
governments might overwhelm us and prevent us from exercising our
essential capacities. In short, the exercise of the capacity
requires some sort of protection. For example, an individual’s
privacy is vulnerable to violation. People can gain access to our
computers without our authorization and view the information we
have stored. They can even use this information to harm us in some
way. The right to privacy, thus, protects certain capacities of
action that are vulnerable to interference from others. Individual
and social energy needs to be expended to protect our
privacy.
- Feasible: Rights make claims over others; they imply duties
that others have. These claims must not deprive the correlative
duty-holders of anything essential. In other words, my rights
claims over you are not so extensive as to deprive you of your
rights. My right to life should not deprive you of your right to
self-protection were I to attack you. Thus, the scope of my right
claims over you and the rest of society are limited by your ability
to reciprocate. I cannot push my claims over you to recognize and
respect my rights to the point where you are deprived of something
essential.
- Duty not to deprive: We have a basic duty not to violate the
rights of others. This entails that we must both recognize and
respect these rights. For example, computing specialists have the
duty not to deprive others of their rights to privacy by hacking
into private files.
- Duty to prevent deprivation: Professionals, because of their
knowledge, are often in the position to prevent others from
depriving third parties of their rights. For example, a computing
specialist may find that a client is not taking sufficient pains to
protect the confidentiality of information about customers.
Outsiders could access this information and use it without the
consent of the customers. The computing specialist could prevent
this violation of privacy by advising the client on ways to protect
this information, say, through encryption. The computing specialist
is not about to violate the customers’ rights to privacy. But
because of special knowledge and skill, the computing specialist
may be in a position to prevent others from violating this
right.
- Duty to aid the deprived: Finally, when others have their
rights violated, we have the duty to aid them in their recovery
from damages. For example, a computing specialist might have a duty
to serve as an expert witness in a lawsuit in which the plaintiff
seeks to recover damages suffered from having her right to privacy
violated. Part of this duty would include accurate, impartial, and
expert testimony.
- We can identify and define specific rights such as due
process. Moreover, we can set forth some of the conditions involved
in recognizing and respecting this right.
- Due Process can be justified by showing that it is essential
to autonomy, vulnerable, and feasible.
- Right holders can be specified.
- Correlative duties and duty holders can be specified.
- Finally, the correlative duty-levels can be specified as the
duties not to violate rights, duties to prevent rights violations
(whenever feasible), and the duties to aid the deprived (whenever
is feasible).
Example Rights Table: Due Process
| Right: Due Process |
Justification |
Right-Holder:Engineer as employee and member of professional
society. |
Correlative Duty-Holder: Engineer's Supervisor, officials in
professional society. |
Duty Level |
| Definition: The right to respond to organizational decisions
that may harm one in terms of a serious organizational grievance
procedure.Necessary Conditions:1. Several levels of appeal.2. Time
limits to each level of appeal.3. Written notice of grievance.4.
Peer representation.5. Outside arbitration. |
| Essential: Due Process is essential in organizations to
prevent the deprivation of other rights or to provide aid in the
case of their deprivation. |
| Vulnerable: Rights in general are not recognized in the
economic sphere, especially in organizations. |
| Feasible: Organizations, have successfully implemented due
process procedures. |
|
Professionals who are subject to professional codes of
ethics. Supports professionals who are ordered to violate
professional standards. |
Human Resources, Management, Personnel
Department.(Individuals with duty to design, implement, and enforce
a due process policy)Corporate directors have the duty to make sure
this is being done. |
| Not to Deprive:Individuals cannot be fired, transferred, or
demoted without due process |
| Prevent Deprivation: Organizations can prevent deprivation
by designing and implementing a comprehensive due process
policy. |
| Aid the DeprivedBinding arbitration and legal measures must
exist to aid those deprived of due process rights |
|
- Describe the claim (essential capacity of action) made by the right. For
example, due process claims the right to a serious
organizational grievance procedure that will enable the right-holder to respond to a decision that has an adverse impact on his or her interests. It may also be necessary in some situations to specify the claim’s necessary
conditions.
- Justify the right claim using the rights justification framework. In other words show that the right claim is essential, vulnerable, and feasible.
- Provide an example of a situation in which the right
claim becomes active. For example, an engineer may claim a right
to due process in order to appeal what he or she considers an unfair dismissal, transfer, or performance evaluation.
- Identify the correlative duty-holder(s)
that need to take steps to recognize and respect the right. For
example, private and government organizations may be duty-bound to
create due process procedures to recognize and respect this
right.
- Further spell out the right by showing what actions the correlative duties involve. For example, a manager should not violate an employee's due process right by firing him or her without just cause. The organization's human resources department might carry out a training program to help managers avoid depriving employees of this right. The organization could aid the deprived by designing and implementing binding arbitration involving an impartial third party.
- Not every claim to a right is a legitimate
or justifiable claim. The purpose of this framework is to get you
into the habit of thinking critically and skeptically about the
rights claims that you and others make. Every legitimate right
claim is essential, vulnerable, and feasible. Correlative duties
are sorted out according to different levels (not to deprive,
prevent deprivation, and aid the deprived); this, in turn, is based
on the capacity of the correlative duty holder to carry them out.
Finally, duties correlative to rights cannot deprive the
duty-holder of something essential.
- Unless you integrate your right and its
correlative duties into the context of your professional or
practical domain, it will remain abstract and irrelevant. Think
about your right in the context of the real world. Think of
everyday situations in which the right and its correlative duties
will arise. Invent cases and scenarios. If you are an engineering
student, think of informed consent in terms of the public’s right
to understand and consent to the risks associated with engineering
projects. If you are a computing student think of what you can do
with computing knowledge and skills to respect or violate privacy
rights. Don’t stop with an abstract accounting of the right and its
correlative duties.
- Rights and duties underlie professional
codes of ethics. But this is not always obvious. For example, the
right of free and informed consent underlies much of the engineer’s
interaction with the public, especially the code responsibility to
hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. Look at the
different stakeholder relations covered in a code of ethics. (In
engineering this would include public, client, profession, and
peer.) What are the rights and duties outlined in these stakeholder
relations? How are they covered in codes of ethics?
- This module is effective in counter-acting
the tendency to invent rights and use them to rationalize dubious
actions and intentions. Think of rights claims as credit backed by
a promise to pay at a later time. If you make a right claim, be
ready to justify it. If someone else makes a right claim, make them
back it up with the justification framework presented in this
module.