College of Computing IT407 Assignment 3: Professional Issues Report

This report addresses professional issues within the context of IT407, focusing on ethical evaluations from various perspectives. The student analyzes scenarios through Kantian and Act Utilitarian viewpoints, highlighting the differences in their approaches to morality and consequences. The report also incorporates Rule Utilitarian perspectives, examining how ethical rules can maximize overall utility. Furthermore, the analysis includes relevant software engineering codes of ethics, emphasizing the importance of integrity and consumer interest. The student justifies the arguments by referencing the joint Software Engineering code of ethics and its significance in professional judgment. The report utilizes references to support its arguments and provide context for the ethical frameworks discussed. The assignment is a solution to a problem set by the College of Computing and Informatics, and explores topics such as the ethical implications of a student's action of increasing the score of others, and the ethical implications of a seller forcing buyers to pay for a slatebook. The report provides a comprehensive overview of ethical considerations in the professional field.

Running Head: PROFESSIONAL ISSUES
PROFESSIONAL ISSUES
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note:

1PROFESSIONAL ISSUES
1. Evaluation with Kantian perspective and Act Utilitarian perspective
Kantian perspective states that performing the activities that will treat the humanity at
the end. Hence, the perspective of Kant is an example of deontological theory in which it is
states that the rightness and wrongness of the actions is not depended on the consequences.
Kant’s theory and the Utilitarian perspective possess an important difference. Utilitarian
perspective believes and measure the rightness and wrongness of any activity with the
consequences (Mill 2016). Hence, from Kant’s perspective the deed of the student is wrong
as it is unethical and do not support the high sense of morality (Udoudom et al. 2019).
However, from the Utilitarian perspective if the activity is done for the benefit of those 19
students then the student is right. It should be also include that increasing someone’s score
immorally do not provide any good for the individual. Hence, from both the perspectives, the
student’s activity cannot be accepted morally.
2. Evaluation with Rule Utilitarian perspective
The Rule Utilitarian perspective believes in people can maximize the utility by setting
up a moral code containing rules. The right moral rules comprise the set of rules that
produces better results comparing to the other possible rules (Hooker 2017). Hence, the
principle of the utility considers the evaluation of rules instead of the individual action.
Hence, selling the slatebook with 189 SR was a rule set by the owner of Extra. Instead of
forcing the existed consumers to pay the rest of the money, the owner needs to stop selling
slatebook and acknowledge the previous mistake. Forcing the buyers for payment is a wrong
demand by the seller as the price was previously set by the owner only. As the Rule
Utilitarian believes in the principle of distributing the happiness equally among people, the
act of forcing for payment can negatively impact on the consumers of Extra.
3. Evaluation with relevant Software Engineering code of ethics

2PROFESSIONAL ISSUES
Among all the ethical codes, the most relatable principles of software engineering are
– firstly, software engineers need to act consistently for the sake of consumer’s interest and
secondly, the engineers must maintain an integrity and interdependence in the process of
professional judgement (Ozkaya, 2019). Hence, from the second principle it would be
advisable to Jack Nicholson to maintain integrity and consider Christina’s concern for the
software.
4. Justification of the argument
The joint Software Engineering code of ethics was intended to set a standard for
practicing and teaching the software engineering. The code instructs the practitioners to
maintain the standards to fulfil the expectation of the society (Ozkaya, 2019). The joint
agreement related to the code of ethics is important to become mentally satisfied with their
judgement procedure. For example, if the repairment of the software by Christina and Jack
Nicholas results into any severe mishap their judgement procedure will remain questionable
however, they will still possess some key points to support their argument on judgement
procedure. Hence, the element of integrity among the activities of the professionals is highly
expected.

3PROFESSIONAL ISSUES
Referencess
Hooker, B., 2017. Feldman, rule-consequentialism, and desert. In The Good, the Right, Life
and Death (pp. 103-113). Routledge.
Mill, J.S., 2016. Utilitarianism. In Seven masterpieces of philosophy (pp. 337-383).
Routledge.
Ozkaya, I. (2019). Ethics Is a Software Design Concern. IEEE Software, 36(3), 4-8.
Udoudom, M.D., Bassey, S.A., Okpe, O. and Adie, T., 2019. Kantian and Utilitarian Ethics
on Capital Punishment. Budapest International Research and Critics Institute (BIRCI-
Journal): Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(2), pp.28-35.