Non-Consequential Ethical Analysis

This document provides an analysis of the non-consequential ethical aspects of cloud computing and data security. It discusses the virtues of honesty and integrity, the principles of the categorical imperative, and the ethical implications of utilitarianism. The document also emphasizes the importance of maintaining privacy and confidentiality in cloud computing.

Running head: NON-CONSEQUENTIAL ETHICAL ANALYSIS
NON-CONSEQUENTIAL ETHICAL ANALYSIS
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1NON-CONSEQUENTIAL ETHICAL ANALYSIS
The act central to the ethical question is the extension of the technology of cloud
computing that offers the security of data of the users.
The two virtues that are associated with the morality of the act are honesty and integrity.
Honesty is the virtue of being honest which is a facet of moral character that connotes positive
and virtuous attributes such as truthfulness along with the absence of lying and cheating. The
virtue of integrity is consists of a facet of the moral character indicates positive and virtuous
attributes such as straightforwardness, honesty and truthfulness1.
The two virtues relevant to the morality of the act of cloud computing and the extension
till which it offers the security of data of the users are honesty and integrity. The act is in regard
to the privacy and confidentiality of the users. Therefore, it is important to maintain honesty and
integrity while considering this act. There is certainly a level of honesty that is required when a
person is trusting cloud computing. The information must be secured in the cloud drive or the
space provided to the clients for usage f their information. Truthfulness is required in order to
ensure that the client’s information is safe with the company offering cloud computing.
The categorical imperative is the central philosophical concept of Immanuel Kant’s
deontological moral philosophy. According to these theories, an action can be judged as right or
wrong not on the basis of the consequences but whether they fulfil an individual’s duty. As per
Immanuel Kant, there was a supreme principle of mortality which he referred to as The
categorical imperative. The act of determining the extent the technology of cloud computing
while offering the security of data of users will require to follow certain principles. The
1 Alzola, Miguel. "Virtuous persons and virtuous actions in business ethics and organizational research." Business
Ethics Quarterly 25.3 (2015): 287-318.

2NON-CONSEQUENTIAL ETHICAL ANALYSIS
principles need to be followed in order to be fitting well in the framework of the categorical
imperative.
Rules can be either framed in specific or general wording. A specific rule is increased
ethical decisions that are more strongly than general rules. The general rule usually has a spill-
over effect on multiple behaviors2. A specific rule on the basis of Kant’s theory of the categorical
imperative, the cloud computing providers, should give justified answers that are related to
safety and security3.
The general rule in regard to the act should be maintaining the privacy of the information
provided by the customers. The cloud computing providers should maintain the confidentiality of
the customers. In case of any grievances, the providers must provide an explanation as well.
Yes, general rules are inherently contradictory as the self-contradictory. Logics are
defined as a formalized system for constructing, manipulating and determining the meaning of
statement within the system. It is due to the fact that even while providing privacy to the users of
cloud computing, it is certainly not possible to provide privacy when the users are using the
platform to store private information.
No, the general rule violates Kant’s practical imperative as the principles of the
categorical imperative are followed while declaring the general rules.
2 Gerlach, Philipp, and Bastian Jaeger. "Another frame, another game? Explaining framing effects in economic
games." (2016).
3 Rippon, Simon. "Were Kant's Hypothetical Imperatives Wide-Scope Oughts?." Australasian Journal of
Philosophy 92.4 (2014): 783-788.

3NON-CONSEQUENTIAL ETHICAL ANALYSIS
Yes, the general rule is contrary to its fundamental purpose as it is never possible to
wholly maintain the privacy of the users. In order to provide security, cloud computing providers
must use the user’s information. Therefore, the general rule is contrary to fundamental purpose4.
The act can be called ethical when perceived from Kant’s ethical system as the act is not
violating the set of principles of the categorical imperative. The act is ethical as the carriers of
the action have been following their duties that they are supposed to do.
According to the utilitarianism, the rightness and wrongness of an action can be decided
by evaluating the consequences. An action’s consequences can be right or wrong when it has a
consequence of helping the greater population5. Therefore, the conclusion of the act can be the
firm should take responsibility for the information that they get from the users for using cloud
computing. There are specific ethical issues with this technology, however when it serves the
greater purpose it cannot be called unethical. Hence, the company must be careful of the users’
information while it operates and does wellness to the people associated with the company.
4 Weil, Prosper. "Towards relative normativity in international law?." Sources of International Law. Routledge,
2017. 123-152.
5 Lyons, David. "Utilitarianism." Wiley Encyclopedia of Management (2015): 1-4.

4NON-CONSEQUENTIAL ETHICAL ANALYSIS
Reference:
Alzola, Miguel. "Virtuous persons and virtuous actions in business ethics and organizational
research." Business Ethics Quarterly 25.3 (2015): 287-318.
Gerlach, Philipp, and Bastian Jaeger. "Another frame, another game? Explaining framing effects
in economic games." (2016).
Lyons, David. "Utilitarianism." Wiley Encyclopedia of Management (2015): 1-4.
Rippon, Simon. "Were Kant's Hypothetical Imperatives Wide-Scope Oughts?." Australasian
Journal of Philosophy 92.4 (2014): 783-788.
Weil, Prosper. "Towards relative normativity in international law?." Sources of International
Law. Routledge, 2017. 123-152.