Ethical Application: Technology Replacing Humans in the Workforce (3…
Ethical Application: Technology Replacing Humans in the Workforce
Outcomes of Technology Replacing Humans in the Workforce
Favorably Affected and Favorable Effects
Consumers benefitting from the decreased probability of human error
Consumers saving money if prices drop due to less labor costs
Companies saving money on labor costs
Individuals who qualify for the jobs created by the demand for these technologies
Companies who profit from the invention and manufacturing of the new technology
The technology industry as a whole will benefit from all of the additional uses which could influence further innovation
New jobs could arise from the new perspective of not having to do the traditional jobs, improving the society
Generations to come
Improvements in industries such as healthcare would benefit the greater good for all current and future generations.
Negatively Affected and Negative Effects
Consumers who like to have face-to-face contact when doing business
Companies who can't compete with technological labor
Those studying for a job that is no longer needed
Those who's jobs are replaced
The potential of technology hacking poses a threat to everyone in the society
Those who's jobs have been deskilled
Bill Gates & Elon Musk have both shown concern for threats of
Technology lacks the empathy and morale that human workers might have
It threatens the justice system: You can't punish or judge technology like you can human decisions
The number of jobs humans can compete for would drop, harming the economy and human lives
3 Ethical Theories:
Nothing can be called 'good' without qualification except a good will.
Technology replacing humans in the workforce is sometimes done in good will - when the reasoning behind the action is how innovation could make the world a better place.
Technology replacing humans in the workforce is sometimes only done for profit or is not intended for the greater good.
Moral laws that Kantian ethics advises humans to follow as their duty can be integrated into technology.
2. Rule Utilitarianism:
Having a good set of rules and reason to believe they maximize happiness/utility allows people to be much less error-prone when making ethical decisions.
The event of technology replacing humans has the potential to comply with all of Bernard Gert's 10 rules of common morality.
job was replaced by technology, humans would not be working. If humans are not working, humans would have a lot of extra time. This extra time would allow more humans to receive higher education. People may be able to focus more on issues that haven't been resolved such as renewable energy and cures for diseases.
Although millions of people on Earth today would be negatively affected by technology replacing them in the workforce, the number of people is still less than collective generations of the future who will benefit from these innovations made in the present.
1. Act Utilitarianism:
It is ethical if it maximizes the total amount of happiness/utility.
Millions of people on Earth are losing their jobs to technology replacement. Millions of other people have jobs that are not currently affected by these types of technological replacements. Both groups will benefit from new innovation thereby exceeding the amount of bad consequences.
In summary, the event of technology replacing humans in the workforce
However, there is a lot of opportunity for people to make this shift towards a workforce of technology through unethical actions. Any unethical events are due to the way the shift is handled, not the shift itself.
e.g.: A world-wide business replaces all human employees with technology illegally or without a fair notice - causing pain, deprivation of pleasure, is deceitful, and cheats workers out of their time and income.