Suchergebnisse

Terveydenhuollon ja terveyspalveluiden siirtyminen tietoverkkoihin nostaa esiin eettisiä haasteita. Etenkin kun digitaalisia ratkaisuja suunnitellaan ikääntyville kansalaisille, tulee ottaa huomioon heidän oikeutensa ja mahdollisuutensa elää hyvää elämää kotona tai kodinomaisessa ympäristössä. Etiikka ja eettinen osaaminen ovatkin tällöin keskeisessä roolissa suunnittelusta aina toteutukseen ja arviointiin saakka. Etiikkaa on tarkasteltava usealta eri näkökulmalta, mutta samalla valitettavan usein törmätään arvokonflikteihin eri eettisten arvojen ja normien välillä. Tämä suunnittelutieteellinen tutkimus tarkastelee digitaalisten terveyspalveluiden kyberturvallisuuteen liittyviä eettisiä asioita neljän eri viitekehyksen kautta: biolääketieteen etiikka, hoitoalan etiikka, terveydenhuollon informaatioteknologian ydintehtävät ja kyberturvallisuuden arvoklusterit. Tutkimus keskittyy eri näkökulmien välisiin arvokonflikteihin ja esittelee eettisen päätöksenteon avuksi käsitemallin eri viitekehysten samanaikaiseen huomioimiseen. Lisäksi artikkeli käsittelee eettistä päätöksentekoa sumean monikriteerisen päätöksenteon avulla sekä pohtii koneoppimisen ja homomorfisen salauksen avulla tuotettavan digitaalisen kaksosen hyödyntämistä tässä yhteydessä.

In this paper it is shown with the help of a small sample that accounting is ethically loaded; that there exists ethical frustration caused by situational factors related to accounting; and that most probably the situational pressures may also change the level of ethics in the Kohlbergian sense; and that in studying accounting-related ethical problems empirically, the paper-and pencil tests and interviewing may give biased results. The accountant's model of the world is supplemented with many discretionary practices. The general structure of this model is determined by the duality of double-entry bookkeeping, the system of stock accounts and flow accounts, principles of valuation, allocation, and control. Financial accounting is strongly controlled by legislation concerning who is obliged to do accounting, what is to be accounted for, how allocations should be made, how valuations should be carried out, and what should be presented in public. But even in these procedures there are many discretionary practices, the use of which is guided by conventions and general ideals like, for example, by a 'true and fair view' or a 'good accounting practice'. In the realm of managerial accounting, the scope of discretion is even greater. To some extent it is, of course, constrained by the demonstration effect of practices present in financial accounting [Johnson et al., 1987], but in principle the hands of the accountant are relatively free. In this paper we present the results of our small-sample investigation into how the ethical dimension was handled in the daily work of some chief executives and heads of accounting departments. We will start by presenting a few theoretical concepts, which explain the way in which the study was conducted, and proceed by illustrating what our interviewees told us about their ethical problems relating to discretionary practices in accounting. Finally, an attempt will be made to draw some generalizations from our observations.

There appears to be a common agreement that ethical concerns are of high importance when it comes to systems equipped with some sort of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Demands for ethical AI are declared from all directions. As a response, in recent years, public bodies, governments, and universities have rushed in to provide a set of principles to be considered when AI based systems are designed and used. We have learned, however, that high-level principles do not turn easily into actionable advice for practitioners. Hence, also companies are publishing their own ethical guidelines to guide their AI development. This paper argues that AI software is still software and needs to be approached from the software development perspective. The software engineering paradigm has introduced maturity model thinking, which provides a roadmap for companies to improve their performance from the selected viewpoints known as the key capabilities. We want to voice out a call for action for the development of a maturity model for AI software. We wish to discuss whether the focus should be on AI ethics or, more broadly, the quality of an AI system, called a maturity model for the development of AI systems. ; peerReviewed

Bioetiikan tieteenala syntyi 1960- ja 1970-luvuilla Yhdysvalloissa. Bioetiikka käsittelee lääke-, terveys- ja biotieteiden eettisiä, moraalisia ja yhteiskunnallisia kysymyksiä. Keskeistä alalle on pyrkimys näiden teemojen moniääniseen ja -arvoiseen pohtimiseen. Bioetiikan syntyyn johti erityisesti radikaali pyrkimys haastaa lääketiedettä ja sen ikiaikaista etiikkaa, jotka koettiin aikanaan yksiäänisiksi ja elitistisiksi. Sitten bioetiikan alkuaikojen paljon on muuttunut. Nykyisin bioetiikka on laaja ja varsin vakiintunut ala synnyinmaassaan ja monin paikoin ympäri maailmaa. Suomessa bioetiikka on tosin yhä suhteellisen tuntemattomassa ja vähäisessä roolissa niin akateemisesti kuin yhteiskunnallisestikin. Menneestä menestyksestään huolimatta bioetiikka käy parhaillaan läpi keski-iän kriisiä, jonka myötä monet tahot alalla ja sen ulkopuolella kysyvät keskeisiä kysymyksiä bioetiikan merkityksestä ja olemuksesta, jopa sen olemassaolon oikeutuksesta. Bioetiikka on selvästi saapunut eräänlaiseen kehityksensä taitekohtaan. Pölyn laskeuduttua bioetiikan alkuaikojen jäljiltä monet kysyvät nykyisin, oliko bioetiikka loppujen lopuksi tervetullut lisä vallitsevaan henkiseen ilmastoon ja mitä tarkoitusta ala tarkalleen ottaen palvelee sekä akateemisessa maailmassa että tämän ulkopuolella. Paljon kritiikkiä on esitetty: joillekin bioetiikka ei ole ikinä ollut mitään todellista, ainakaan myönteisessä mielessä. Pikemmin näille kriitikoille bioetiikka on näyttäytynyt lähinnä rasitteena, joka on ollut lääke-, terveys- ja biotieteiden ja niiden soveltamisen tiellä, varsinkin terveydenhuollon piirissä. Toiset keskustelijat taas ovat vahvasti eri mieltä. Kaikkineen ilmassa on paljon erilaisia näkemyksiä eikä yhteistä maaperää ole paljon. Joka tapauksessa on varmaa, että tämän keskustelun lopputulos tulee keskeisesti vaikuttamaan alan tulevaisuuden kehitykseen, joten panokset ovat korkeat. Tämä tutkimus pyrkii tarjoamaan tuoreita vastauksia käynnissä olevaan keskusteluun bioetiikan luonteesta valottamalla alan menneisyyttä ja nykyistä tilaa aate- ja oppihistorian sekä kulttuurihistorian näkökulmasta. Tämän viitekehyksen puitteissa sovelletaan yhä kattavaa teoreettista kirjoa, johon ammennetaan muun muassa poliittisten instituutioiden rappion, poliittisen filosofian sekä sosiaalisen pääoman tutkimuksen parista. Tarkoituksena on kaivaa esille syvempi bioetiikan luonne, erityisesti alan kulttuurillinen ydinolemus. Tutkimuksen keskeinen argumentti tiivistyy kahteen havainnoituun bioetiikan ydinpiirteeseen: alan pyrkimykseen olla avoin erilaisille henkisille lähestymistavoille sekä sosiaalisesti uusille osanottajille: siis toisin sanoen alan pyrkimykseen olla moniääninen ja -arvoinen. Nämä havainnot johtavat tutkimuksessa yhä uusien bioetiikan alan puolien valottamiseen, joista mainittakoon esimerkiksi bioetiikan pyrkimys pysytellä tarkoituksellisesti tietyssä mielessä henkisesti pinnalla, menemättä liian syvälle mihinkään tiettyihin eettisiin, moraalisiin ja yhteiskunnallisiin näkemyksiin. Tutkimuksessa argumentoidaan, että tällaisten bioetiikan piirteiden kokonaisvaltaisempi ymmärtäminen auttaa samalla hahmottamaan selvän haasteen näiden ominaisuuksien kattavammaksi hyväksymiseksi ja tukemiseksi. Samalla tässä haasteessa muotoutuu eräs mahdollinen tie bioetiikalle siirtyä pois sen alun ja nykyisten ajatusmallien parista ja kukoistaa paremmin tulevaisuudessa. Syvimmiltään tutkimuksessa puolustetaan näkemystä, jonka mukaan bioetiikka voidaan – ja se pitäisi – nähdä kulttuurillisena jättiläisenä, joka on tärkeä osa ainakin länsimaista kulttuuripiiriä. Toisin sanoen bioetiikka nähdään kulttuurillisena voimana, joka voi osaltaan auttaa poliittisia ja sosiaalisia instituutioita uudistumaan nykyisin vallitsevien yhteiskunnallisten tarpeiden mukaan. Tämän ohella tutkimuksessa argumentoidaan, että bioetiikka on kulttuurillisesti itseisarvoinen asia, jota ei tulisi arvioida ainoastaan sen hyötyjen kautta vaan pikemmin hyväksyä vallitsevana kulttuurin osana. Lisäksi tutkimuksessa pyritään auttamaan bioetiikkaa kehittymään tulevaisuudessa hahmottelemalla joitakin konkreettisempia ehdotuksia etenemiselle. Erityinen painoarvo asetetaan aidosti uuden ajatusjärjestelmän kehittämiselle tämän pyrkimyksen tukemiseksi. Tässä hengessä tutkimuksessa luodaan alustavasti "orgaanisen bioetiikan" käsite, jonka tarkoitus on auttaa paremmin käsitteellistämään ja omaksumaan bioetiikan luonnetta ja alan parhaita puolia. ; The field of bioethics was established in the United States during the sixties and early seventies. The field addresses the ethical challenges of life sciences--the science of living organisms, from plants to humans--and tries to incorporate various perspectives in doing this. It mostly came into being as a radical challenge to the medical profession and its age-old tradition of ethics, which were seen as exclusivist and elitist. A lot has changed since the early days. Today, bioethics is a broad and somewhat established field in its country of origin and in many places throughout the world. However, despite its past successes, bioethics now appears to be undergoing a middle age crisis in which people in the field, along with others, are asking perplexing questions about its meaning, essence, and even its reason for being. Bioethics has clearly arrived at some kind of turning point. As the dust has settled from the early days, many are asking whether bioethics was, after all, a welcome addition to prevailing intellectual vocabulary and what precise purpose it serves in academia and in society today. Much criticism has been raised: to some, bioethics has never been a real thing, at least in any positive sense. Rather, for them bioethics is only a nuisance that gets in life sciences' and their application's way, especially in health care. Others strongly disagree with this. And then there are other views. All in all, everyone seems to have her own conception of the way things are. However, what is certain is that the outcome of this debate will have a significant impact on determining the future of the field. The stakes are high. This study seeks to offer fresh answers to the ongoing debate about the nature of bioethics by exploring bioethics' past and current state from the perspective of intellectual and cultural history. Under this umbrella, a range of theories from political decay to political philosophy to social capital are applied to unearth the deeper nature of the field, especially its cultural essence. A central argument revolves around two identified core characteristics of bioethics: its aspirations to be intellectually open-ended and to be socially inclusive. This observation leads to further identification of the field's features such as the "deliberative shallowness of bioethics." The study argues that by appreciating these aspects of bioethics, a clear challenge to embrace and support them emerges. At the same time, this offers a potential way for bioethics to move forward from its early and present schemes and for it to flourish in the future. Eventually, the study argues that bioethics could, and should, be seen as a "cultural giant," an important part of at least Western culture--a cultural force that could help, for its part, to renew political and social institutions according to present needs. Besides this, bioethics is also argued to have an intrinsic cultural value, in other words, bioethics should not only be judged by its merits; rather, it should be accepted as a matter of fact of the current cultural landscape. Moreover, to assist bioethics to move forward, the study sketches a few more precise suggestions of how this could be done. Particular emphasis is placed on developing a genuinely new kind of body of thought to support this endeavor. To this end, preliminarily, the study coins a new term, "organic bioethics," to help in better conceptualizing and embracing the nature of the field and its best qualities.

The chapter studies the ethical dimensions of Beauvoir's existentialism and Irigaray's ontology of difference. It argues that Irigaray builds on one central but largely neglected result of Beauvoir's moral philosophical argumentation: the claim that fundamentally sexual subordination constitutes an ethical problem that cannot be adequately solved merely through social reforms, political interventions, or theoretical reflections. By comparing Beauvoir's concept of erotic generosity to Irigaray's discussion of wonder and love, the chapter demonstrates that both philosophers conceive of male privilege as an ethical issue that must be worked out between individual women and men in their concrete encounters. The task is to reform and cultivate not just human behaviors, actions, beliefs and cognitions, but also one's own emotions and desires. ; peerReviewed

Journalistic codes of ethics articulate conventions of professionalism as it is understood in Western democracies. Codes of ethics combine theoretical and applied ethics, defining the duties (e.g., service of the public, respect for human dignity, etc.) and offering practical instructions for information gathering, processing, and publishing. Codes of ethics do not solve ethical dilemmas but oblige journalists toward moral reasoning and give advice for making the right decisions. The codes of ethics created for traditional media have become insufficient in the current digital media era. The internet is global, as is the public, and increasingly, also the practice of journalism. The global information and communication conglomerates prioritize their commercial interests over the public interests. Journalists are working in the center of this conflict. To maintain and enhance ethical journalism, new types of accountability mechanisms and a media policy supportive of media accountability and criticism need to be created. ; peerReviewed

Ethical concerns related to Artificial Intelligence (AI) equipped systems are prompting demands for ethical AI from all directions. As a response, in recent years public bodies, governments, and companies have rushed to provide guidelines and principles for how AI-based systems are designed and used ethically. We have learned, however, that high-level principles and ethical guidelines cannot be easily converted into actionable advice for industrial organizations that develop AI-based information systems. Maturity models are commonly used in software and systems development companies as a roadmap for improving the performance. We argue that they could also be applied in the context of developing ethically aligned AI systems. In this paper, we propose a maturity model for AI ethics and explain how it can be devised by using a Design Science Research approach. ; peerReviewed

This study evaluated five early cases in which esport developer Riot Games made rulings regarding activities and infractions by members of various institutions related to its product, League of Legends. The findings of this study support future theoretical exploration of other esports in seeking a fuller understanding of issues related to consent, power differentials, and roles and behaviors expected of the institutional activities of players and teams in competition. Increased investigation of these—and other—issues from an ethical standpoint could lead to a framework that not only would facilitate future study but also bring opportunities for improvements in practices in concert with necessary policy changes. ; peerReviewed

Various recent Artificial Intelligence (AI) system failures, some of which have made the global headlines, have highlighted issues in these systems. These failures have resulted in calls for more ethical AI systems that better take into account their effects on various stakeholders. However, implementing AI ethics into practice is still an on-going challenge. High-level guidelines for doing so exist, devised by governments and private organizations alike, but lack practicality for developers. To address this issue, in this paper, we present a method for implementing AI ethics. The method, ECCOLA, has been iteratively developed using a cyclical action design research approach. The method aims at making the high-level AI ethics principles more practical, making it possible for developers to more easily implement them in practice. ; peerReviewed

Background Schools are seen as crucial environments to influence and develop the health literacy of new generations, but without sufficient reflection on the ethical underpinnings of intentions and interventions around health literacy. In contrast, we argue here that ethics are fundamental to all education. The article adopts a 'One world' approach that generalizes broadly across the so-called Global North and Global South. It also generalizes across various age groups among school pupils, advocating age appropriate application of the arguments advanced. Main text Our analysis examines why health literacy should be promoted in schools and argues that the purpose should embrace the values of social justice and should not stop at individual and national cost benefit analysis. Discussion about the orientation of health literacy highlights meta-cognitive skills around critical thinking, self-awareness and citizenship rather than lists of practical skills. Finally, approaches to health literacy in classrooms are presented with an ethical tone that draws attention to the power relations responsible for health inequities and that does not assume that such power relations are the given framework for health literacy interventions and activities. These arguments are reinforced by urging that related debates address dynamic social realities such as international migration. Conclusions We reiterate the need for ethical questions to be consciously and systematically addressed from early on, beginning with intentions to promote health literacy even before these intentions are translated into action, within the political space where education meets public health and health promotion. We underline again the context of fluidity and dynamism, as new challenges emerge within pedagogies and curricula, especially in response to changing populations in the society around. ; peerReviewed