The weakness of social ethics in cyberspace from the perspective of moral sensitivity

Author

Faculty member of the academy of Islamic Sciences and Culture

10.22081/jare.2023.67301.1854

Abstract

The growing trend of immoral conduct always makes the thinkers and policymakers of the society to think of solution, before the society reaches the point of irreversibility in the vortex of these immoral conducts. Today, in cyberspace, we see more immoral conducts than physical space. The present article seeks to answer the question why we see immoral behavior with others in cyberspace more than physical space? The subject of the present study is limited to communicative misconducts (such as insults and privacy violations) and does not include personal harms (such as pornography addiction). To answer this question, James Rest's four-component theory has been used. The research hypothesis is that current means of communication have indirectly connected people and thus reduced their moral sensitivity. This decrease in sensitivity is the cause of much ethical misconduct in cyberspace. To support this hypothesis, evidence from experimental studies is provided: Findings from moral psychology, behavioral economics, and other branches of behavioral science.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1.  

    1. Ariely, Dan (2012). The honest truth about dishonesty: how we lie to everyone, especially ourselves. translated by Ramin Rambod. Tehran: Maziyar.
    2. Berkowitz, M. W. (1996). The education of the complete moral person, Gordon Cook Foundation.

    3.       Hastings, Paul D., Zahn-Waxler, Carolyn and McShane, Kelly (2010). “We Are, by Nature, Moral Creatures: Biological Bases of Concern for Others”. in Melanie Killen, Judith G. Smetana (eds.) Handbook of Moral Development. translated by Seyed Rahoim Rastitabar. Qom: Islamic Science and Culture Research Institute.

    1. Hoffman, M. L. (2001). “Toward a comprehensive empathy-based theory of prosocial moral development”. In A. C. Bohart & D. J. Stipek (eds.). constructive and destructive behavior (pp. 61-86). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
    2. Hoffman, M.L. (2007). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    3. Karimi, Yousof (2011). Social psychology; Theories, concepts and applies. Tehran: Arasbaran.
    4. Lehrer, Jonah (2010). Decision making. translated by Asghar Andaroudi. Tehran: Dayereh.
    5. Narvaez, Darcia & Rest, James (1995). “Four components of acting morally”. In William M. kurtines and Jacob L. Gewirtz (eds.). moral development: An introduction, Allyn & Bacon.
    6. Smetana, Judith (2013). “Moral Development: The Social Domain Theory View”. In Philip David Zelazo (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Developmental Psychology, Vol. 1: Body and Mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
    7. Weiten, Weyne (2017). pcychology; themes and variations. translated by Yahya Seyed Mohammadi. Tehran: Ravan publication.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 04 September 2023
  • Revise Date: 09 October 2023
  • Accept Date: 23 January 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics