Duties and Obligations

By Stephen Downes
Nov 05, 2021
Transcript of Duties and Obligations

Unedited audio transcription from Google Recorder.

Hello, everyone. I'm Stephen Downes. Welcome back to ethics analytics and the duty of care Today, we'll be talking about obligations and duties. This is part of module for which looks at ethical codes. And the idea here today is that we will be looking at the question of who we owe obligations and duties to with a focus on ethical codes.

And as always with a focus on analytics and AI and specifically in the context of learning and this sort of getting hard to stay zero down on our topic because you know, we might start looking at learning and teaching but we end up looking at the broad scope of obligations and duties as their instantiated ethical codes across society.

And this presentation what we're going to look specifically at are the different entities or perhaps more accurately, the different types of entities to which the ethical codes are you not in some way, we owe an allegiance to a loyalty to or a duty to in some sort or another often internet in an ethical principle or ethical code.

The locus of duty is not clear, for example, of a company, skewing the data in order to sway. And AI model, it's where to particular set of outcomes does the employee have the duty to disclose this. To a media, does the employee have a duty to disclose it the clients or funders or does loyalty to the company prevail in such a case.

And as we widen our consideration beyond simple transactions, the scope of our duties widens as well. Our duty to traffic travel to Africa, to support a new, try that, again, our duty to travel to Africa, to support a learning program, may not conflict where the duty to preserve the environment, but it may or desire to eat meat.

May conflict with what activists like Peter Singer like to think of as a duty to the environment for a duty to animals. So as soon as you have a multiplicity of duties to different entities, you've created a whole new range of cases where ethical principles can come in conflict with each other.

So in this presentation, we'll look specifically at the different sorts of entities. And we'll look to some degree at the sorts of duties. That we might have toward these entities and talk about where these can be found. Or in some cases not found in the ethical codes that we've studied so far as a part of this course.

So let's begin. Then with duties to self, no different ways of looking at this most ethical codes, have a principle of conflict of interest which is to say that we should not conduct ourselves professionally in a way that serves ourselves or benefits ourselves. And yet by the same token, many of the ethical principles talked about a way of culture cultivating, a better self and indeed, some of them might be thought of as promoting desirable attributes of self.

So, on the one hand, the no one principles. For example, make clear that the ethics of a member of the public service is selflessness, but on the other hand, we have a number of associations say things like self-knowledge or promoting things, like self-knowledge regarding how their own values attitudes experience and social contexts influence their actions.

Interpretations choices and recommendations. They desirable attributes of self. We see things like autonomous self-realization human agency into promotion of individual capabilities, or to participate in programs of professional growth, like in-service, training, seminars, symposia workshops and conferences etc. And there's a principle. And I illustrated that in the diagram, on the slide here arotay, which is a principle of.

If you will be all that, you can be rise to your full potential and it's an aspect of character ethics, and we'll talk about that in the next module. But the idea is that the ethics promoted by the ethical code, includes an ethics that promotes the idea that a professional or a person following the code, the augments the wrong capacities to the greatest degree possible.

And so we have codes talking about excellence and integrity and the rest of it.

Another group of people who could be considered the object or subject of our ethical codes, is a group of people will call here, simply the last fortunate and there are many ways of describing what counts, as more fortunate and less fortunate. But what we find is that they are not very frequently referenced in codes of ethics at all.

They show up in other codes like hammer rabies code includes the edict. The strong may not oppress the week and Peter singer talks about it in his 2009 book, the life, you can say, but overall in the ethical codes that were considered for this study, there was basically no discussion of an obligation or a duty toward the last fortunate.

And I think the resistance to considering such matters is telling I think that the focus here is on the ethics of the person, in the profession and serving, if you will paying clients and only in some unusual circumstances, do those clients ever include the less fortunate? Now, as it turns out, I did not include in my original sample, a code of ethics, from say, social work.

Although, as I speak right now, that has been added as ethical code number 44, or sorry. Number 74 in the study. Nonetheless, I think there is something that could be said about the lack of attention to the last fortunate in professional codes of ethics in academic codes, or codes.

For teachers, students are very frequently referenced as the object of specific obligations or duties. Although, this comes up in different ways, the code solely, assigns a three-fold responsibility, in their duties, as educator. They are training the individual perhaps so that the individual can rise to the best of their capabilities.

But they're also responsible for training, the worker and the citizen and it suggests that the obligation towards the student isn't universal. It isn't specifically. And only an obligation to a student, but also an obligation to. Shall we say future employers or the country? The national education association. Also focuses on the obligation toward the individual and here suggests that teachers strive to help each student realize his, or her potential is a worthy and effective member of society.

The opening university code to search, that students should be engaged as active agents in the implementation of learning analytics and others. They should actually be part of the discussion. And this includes discussion of informed consent, personal learning paths. And other interventions depicted here on the slide is a document or an image rather from the Carlton University student affairs office.

And it's illustrative of the idea that the rights of students and therefore are obligation to students are often conditional. And they're depicted especially by administrators towards students, not simply as rights but as rights and responsibilities. And you know, this is a discussion that happens reasonably often in the discussion of rights, where the suggestion is, you cannot have a right without a corresponding responsibility.

And I find very often when the discussion of an obligation to a subordinate group is raced by these by the professional association organization. And question that these rights are represented ask conditional as concordant with a set of responsibilities. So here we have in Carlton, the various rights, including participation in students, associations freedom of discovery or sorry.

Freedom of discussion. Assembly confidenceiality right to a fair process and natural justice but also individual responsibility and accountability. And then, finally the students write to representation along the same lines. We have the ethical obligation to children. Again, we don't see a lot of discussion in the different codes of ethics, specifically, with respect to children, although it does come up the federal trade commissions commission back.

When all of this was first being discussed in the 90s noted, the widespread collection of personally affirmation from even very young children without parental involvement or awareness. And it's interesting that at the time, this was considered normal, and not a problem today, I'm not so much the case. The, for example, has an extensive provision on safety and security for children confidentiality and whistleblowing noting specifically, that adults have a responsibility to ensure that this unequal balance of power between themselves.

And children is not used for their personal advantage. Also point out here. And this one comes from peel that very often professionals will have a duty to report in cases where a children's welfare or a child's health may be threatened.

But also have duties with respect to parents or guardians and these show up basically in two major ways. First of all, where parents may act as a proxy for children with respect to matters of consent. So if there is an obligation of consent and if that obligation is being applied to a child, then that obligation is also to the parent who is acting as a child.

It also creates responsibilities for parents to stand in as that proxy and that we're going a bit beyond the scope of this particular discussion. But there's a whole range of responsibilities of parents to children, that could be discussed in a different context. There's also the idea that the parents especially or sometimes the guardian is in themselves, a special interest that needs to be protected.

For example, there's an Indian code of ethics that advises teachers to refrain from doing anything that may undermine students confidence in their parents or guardians. So, the idea here, is that the professional or the person following ethical code needs to recognize that parents have specific privileges with respect to their children.

I am or we might say specific rights with respect to their children. One of which is stated explicitly, here is to not be undermined, you know, as authorities or as role models. Etc. I also think it's worth noting that duties to one's own parents are not mentioned anywhere in the codes of ethics that we reviewed for this course, not at all ever another area, which is completely lacking in any of these codes of ethics.

And I thought I should put it in because it's so prominent. Outside codes of ethics is duty to one's family, or perhaps duty to the concept of family. Generally certainly, there's a large category of ethical principles, or ethical values related to that. There is a sense. Among many people, I think that an obligation to one's family is an ethical principle.

Certainly such an obligation, especially in obligation to one's parents, surfaces, and ethical principles advanced by people like Confucius. And there's a sense in which we have an ethical value along the lines of family first. And again, although I did not see this expressed in many of the ethical codes.

I think that if we considered what a code of ethics would look like for a workplace, it would include something like allowance for one's own ethical responsibility, for one's own family.

A group that is mentioned, a lot, is the client and in fact, in many, ethical codes the first and only duty is to the clients and this is, especially the case in service professions such as finance and accounting, or legal representation, where the obligation to the client is expressed as fiduciary duties, which are to quotes special obligations between one party often with power or ability to exercise discretion that impacts on the other party who may be vulnerable.

In the case of health care, the needs of the client are often paramount. The declaration of Helsinki. For example states, that the health of my parents. Sorry, the health of my patient will be my first consideration, and it cites the international code of medical ethics. In saying it is the duty of the physician to promote and safeguard the health well-being and rights of parents, including those who are involved in medical research.

In the case where there are multiple duties owed the client may be assigned priority with other other entities, receiving secondary consideration. For example, when research and clinical needs conflict, then the instruction is to prioritize the welfare of the client. Now, there is in many cases, and ambiguity in the concept of clients because the role of client can be divided into different parts.

On the one hand, the client is the person who's paying the bills, the client. And other words is the customer, but is the duty to the client, a duty simply because the clients is the one paying the bills. I don't think that that's the case. In many medical situations, for example, we see a split between the role of the patient who is the client and then the health insurance or in Canada provincial health care programs who are actually paying the bill.

And so here one with his home although it's not always clear but one would assume that the ethical duty to the client in such a case, is an ethical duty to the patient. Even if the patient is not the one paying the bills, this is something that doesn't just happen in health care, it happens and things like social work or public services to a large degree.

It happens in education, especially in the lower grades where children are rarely paying for the wrong education. Parents may be paying for the education and may thereby be considered the client in part but in cases, the public education, the government is paying the bills. The child is the client.

And then we see a bit of a split between the responsibility to the client, the student and the payer the government, and it's not limited even to the helping professions. We see, for example, in media and journalism, the client might be thought of as the audience or the client might be thought of as the advertiser and it depends on what part of media you're working with which of these prevails in a news broadcast.

For example, the needs of the viewer are generally considered more paramount, but in social media as we will know, the client is the person paying the bills, the advertiser and the user of the system isn't considered a client at all. The user in fact is considered the product their attention.

Being what is sold to advertisers and many research ethics principles, the research subject is described as the objects of ethical codes. In other words, researchers have and ethical duty to their subjects. We can talk about and we have talked about this in in some depth already. For example, the principle of consent, the principle of being fully informed of the consequences, the principle of harm, not being caused, the research subject, it seems this role, well, arguably, beginning with the neuromberg principles or perhaps, even earlier and this continues through to other disciplines such as marketing or journalism, where the research subject again, is, old ethical consideration.

We see this, especially in journalism, where the research subject. If we want to call them that is the person about whom the journalist is writing. So, if a journalist covers a car accident, for example, the victims of the car accident are the research subject. While the clients are the readers of the story about the car accident clients interest.

In this case, would certainly conflict with the victims interest, the victim would like some privacy. Perhaps or at least to be considered to be treated with respect while the client may want to know all of the tales of the accident. We see this tension between these two roles especially in paparazzi type journalism, where very often the research subject.

The celebrity being covered by the paparazzi is not accorded any ethical value and the the interests of the clients or perhaps the funder are considered paramount. Similarly, in cases of learning analytics, we might think of the students as clients, but they are also very definitely research subjects. And so again, as the open university, code asserts students should be engaged in as activations in the implementation of learning analytics.

In other words, students as research subjects have ethical standing visa the researcher in such studies. And so would be considered to be the recipient of rights and possibly responsibilities depending on how we've worded that. Another class of objects of ethical principles is the employer and here. What we have our cases where ethical codes state that the worker or the professional has an ethical obligation to their employer.

This is often referenced as an employees duty of loyalty and and it's most clear in public service ethics. Certainly I've seen that expressed in our own declarations of public service ethics in the Canadian government. Sometimes when new governments are elected, they make a specific point to remind public services public service employees that they do have a duty of employer but sorry, a duty of loyalty to their new employer.

Same thing holds true sometimes in the case of ethical codes for professors or for teachers where there's presumed to be a duty of loyalty or at the very least affiliation to their educational institution or to their school. Usually with respect to the standing of the school or university in public perception.

Some idea here is you know don't make your employer look bad don't make the school look bad and we see this in private sector employment as well especially in sectors like IT and journalism. Where that duty extends, not just to protecting the employers reputation, but also things like protecting their trade secrets or other confidential aspects of the work that's being undertaken.

I think it's interesting to point out that again in the ethical codes listed. There was no corresponding duty to employee that surfaced anywhere that I could find. Now the Route duties to employees specified in labor codes, but it should be pointed out that many professor, many professionals are employers.

They do hire and manage people, like office, assistants lab technicians, student workers and alike, maintenance staff. And so, it seems odd that their obligations to their employees would not be included in these ethical codes. What sort of duties would there be well? In for one example, it's an employer's duty to manage all the risk in the workplace.

And so, the employer should have managing risk in the workplace as an ethical responsibility. One would assume and that includes things like eliminating hazards, identifying hazards mitigating. Those it cannot be eliminated. Make sure making sure, adequate personal protective equipment is available. Making sure there's adequate supervision. And of course, making sure that there's training odd that this isn't in the professional coach.

Although that's said, I only surveyed 74 of them. And it may be that there's a large number of codes out there that actually do specify, this sort of obligation on the part of professionals. Sometimes in these codes, we can see at the very least, implicitly recognition that a funder may make a claim on the duties of the researcher.

As Dingwell specifically says. Now the funder is very often distinct from the employer very often distinct from the client or the customer. And when we get cases like, for example, government funding crowd, funding Philanthropic, funding court, corporate partners or say, venture capital or other funds. That the holders of these funds.

May expect that the recipients of the funds, have an ethical obligation to them and we see this actually implemented in some places. A good example is the recent round of requirements on the part of government funding agencies, including those here in Canada, to the effect. That researchers have an obligation to publish their results in an open access publication.

So in other words, a requirement of open research. Now whether this is an ethical obligation is something that can be discussed and debated, but it's certainly the case that this obligation was imposed and implemented by the funders. In this case, There were other cases where the obligation to funder may be less clear.

Although the idea of that exists can perhaps be a deast, through some examples, where it was kind of ignored. One of the best examples is in the case of Oculus Rift. Oculus Rift started off as a crowd-funded company, but then the, the founders of Oculus Rift turned around and sold the whole thing over to Facebook.

This drew the ire of the crowdfunding community who did not expect that they were funding, something that would simply be sold to a private company philanthropic funding also imposes requirements, sometimes these requirements aren't exposed aren't explicitly stated but may exist. Sort of as unwritten or unstated conditions of funding typically.

Philanthropies, fill up, philanthropic foundations, have an agenda or at least an idea of the sort of research or development project that they want to fund very often. These agenda are for particular political or ethical perspective. Perhaps, for example, they're seeking to support enterprises that demonstrate entrepreneurship or perhaps, they're looking for enterprises that involve community participation etc.

And so these things again maybe brought forward as conditions of funding. Now, again, whether these are ethical principles or whether they're simply structural principles, contractual relations between funders and recipients is something that may be discussed and certainly not resolved here.

Many ethical principles ethical codes speak of an obligation to one's colleagues and one way or another, this shows up in a number different ways, very often they will talk about colleagues interacting from a position of mutual respect with each other and and we find this in a lot of employer employee codes as well.

Certainly that exists in our own employer. The NRC. Also this obligation is exists between the individual professional and the members of the profession thought of as an association as a whole. So the idea here is that if the majority of the profession, sorry if there, if the majority of the members of the profession, follow the standards, the profession will have a good reputation, and many and members will generally benefit.

So the idea here is that by being a good professional. You are improving the standing of all of the members of that professional. It's also should be noted that this obligation this ethical obligation is in a very real sense. Self imposed. And as, as wheel says, if a member freely declares or professes herself to be part of a profession, she is voluntarily implying that she will follow these special moral codes and that's what produces the benefits for the majority of the members of the profession.

Now, this term stakeholders is used a lot, not just in ethical codes, but in discussions of ethical principles. Generally projects, consultations management, practices etc, the term stakeholder, really expands on the idea of the concept of the stockholder and is intended to represent a wider body of interests to which a management or a professional might be obligated.

The idea is that it's not only in the stockholder of a company that has a financial or a fiduciary interest in the conduct of a corporation, but other people or groups of people also have an interest in the outcome and such stakeholders could include customers employees investors suppliers communities, and governments to name.

A few one of the things, I think that important to keep in mind with respect, to the concept of stakeholders, is the sense that to become a stakeholder typically requires that. You have some investment in the outcome of whatever is taking place. I mean, vestment in the research or an investment in the code of conduct of the profession.

And that usually is taken to me a financial interest and that can manifest itself in two ways. First of all an actual financial investment that a person or group of people have made for example as a purchaser or perhaps as a funder of another price or a professional and on the other hand people who stand to earn money or lose money, more often based on the actions of the organization in question.

And and that's why the concept of stakeholders is especially relevant. When discussing the ethics and the management of public enterprises, first of all, in public enterprises that is to say enterprises that are run by governments or perhaps non-government organizations as opposed to companies in public enterprises. There aren't investors in the sense of people who have bought stock in the project or in the company, the investors are much more amorphous groups.

Like, you know, the taxpayers or the government. And when there is no direct financial contribution to the outcome, then you need to look elsewhere to find who is impacted financially, by the actions of the professional or the research project or whatever. And so that's why you turn to a wider concept like stakeholders.

So we see a lot, the reference to stakeholders in the ethics of artificial intelligence and analytics. For example, field says the developers of AI systems should make sure to consult all stakeholders in the system and plan for long-term effects. The open university policy is based on significant and I'm quote quoting here, significant consultation with key stakeholders and review of existing practice in other higher ed.

Since I'm detailed in the literature and even one of the delicate principles and we will talk. We've talked about that by Dresler and griller requires that researchers quote, talk to stakeholders and give assurance as about the data distribution and use. So again, stakeholder might be someone with a financial investment freeman.

Says, it's any group or individual who can affect or be affected by the achievement of the corporations or organizations purpose or performance? We might think of it as the interconnected relationships between a business and its customers suppliers or and employees or others. Have a stake in the organization, but there's really no firm definition of stakeholders.

It does, as I say, 10 to lean more on the idea of people with a financial interest and you know, there's no good way to say, you are a stakeholder. You are not a stakeholder. You usually, the consultation with stakeholders benefits those with the means and the interest to organize themselves into a group.

Able to represent themselves to this particular company or project. We also see reference to publishers and content. Producers this varies depending and librarians, especially or subject, to special obligations to publishers, according to some codes things, like, respecting or rights of publishers, making sure that the works are properly. Paid for all the rest.

This responsibility is often expended as a prohibition against plagiarism and we see, as you can see on the slide here, numerous codes of ethics, have edicts, opposing plagiarism. Certainly there has been a concerted effort especially on a part of publishers but content. Producers generally to make it the case, that respect for the producer of content is included as an ethical principle and specifically, the idea that respect for copyright is an ethical principle.

It's not clear to me that it is. It is clear that it's a principle of governance with existing law and therefore is part of our legal code. But by the same token, it could be argued and has been argued by people like Aaron Schwartz among others that the imposition of copyright, especially over works intended for research or education is in itself.

Unethical. So there's a current debate about this of. I think that widely many codes of ethics, those that are not silent on the subject agree, that the people who produce content should be credited for that. They do not and are in no way unanimous on whether any further obligation exists to publishers or content.

Producers, I've included a reference here to ethical obligation to specific cultural groups. I've kept that very general and part of the reason I kept that very general is because this particular group, this type of group of people appears nowhere in any ethical code, I'm having trouble with my mass nouns here, right?

Because specific cultural groups themselves are groups of people. And then I'm talking about groups of groups of people. It's a bit hard to keep all my known straight but we can talk about this for example, specifically with reference to say, an obligation or a duty to consult with indigenous people's in the conduct of research or in the application of analytics or artificial intelligence and illustrated.

Here is a set of consulting requirements. For projects involving Aboriginal people, in Australia and New Zealand. And this would include things like prioritizing their interests honoring, their evaluation results, prioritizing community interests, and the project and evaluation plan securing and honoring community buying etc. And we have or more actually, I think are in the process of developing similar requirements here in Canada.

And there is current debate on that, which is why I have a reference to the freezer institute on assessing the DD to consult indigenous people's here in Canada, but the list of specific cultural groups is much longer than simply indigenous. People specific cultural groups could be widely construed. For example, an ethical code could say that professionals or organizations, working in analytics, and AI have a responsibility specifically to women in particular as opposed to the same sort of responsibility to women and name, generally or perhaps, to visible minorities, or perhaps as has been raised on a number of occasions to specific cultural groups like linguistic groups.

I read an article just the other day on unicode saying, essentially that, you know, I can, I can draw a pile of poop on my computer, but I can't type my own name and not create a representation problem, obviously in analytics, and AI. And so, arguably, ethical codes could conceivably include a reference to an obligation to different linguistic groups as well.

And this is come up in a number of items outside of these ethical codes reference to specific religions or religious practices either in terms of respecting the values of the religion or in specific ways of handling data that's collected from religious groups. Should, for example, images be taken of groups that have an objection to their images.

Being collected, should the names of people who have who are now deceased be included in databases, which reference people who know longer speak of or name, the people who are deceased etc again. A range of things that could be discussed here, and it's worth noting again. None of this appears in any of the ethical codes that I study.

Definitely something to think about the references to of a responsibility, to society, as a whole are scarce, in the educate, in the ethical codes, but they do exist. British, the British, educational research association, specifically, argues, for a responsibility to serve the public interest. The null and principles, which apply to public employees, state that holders of public office, are accountable to the public two of the computer.

Ethics institutes, ten commandments recommend that computer professionals. Think about the social consequences and ensure consideration and respect for other humans of their research. And we can think about why variety of types of responsibility and obligations to society as a whole in other areas, it's talked about more explicitly under the heading of corporate social responsibility and includes things like health and safety.

Quality teamwork integrity professionalism, etc. All the usual, but and I don't have the diagram here, but I thought about including it, it could instead reflect for example, I'd hear to United Nations 24, sustainable development goals, which education is one. It's SDG4. And there are number of other principles talking about human well-being as a whole environmental protection and so on.

Again, rare to find any reference to social responsibility in these codes of ethics. Again, that's telling I've looked for these together in my original draft, I have simply law and country, and I decided to include God law, king and country to make it a bit more inclusive again. These are rarely mentioned in codes of ethics.

Although I do remember when I took my boy scout oath promising, loyalty to God and the queen and country, my jaw was many years ago, some codes specifically state that people have an obligation and ethical obligation of respect for the law. The IATP code, which was cited and educos reviews.

Recently is 2017, stakes are used to state. I shall uphold my nation and shall honor the chosen way of life of my fellow citizens, which sounds like truth justice. And the American way of although even Superman's slogan has been revised away from specific reference to a specific country. Otherwise, we don't see that so much.

There is no reference to God or religion and many of the ethical codes, except with respect to, you know, promotion of diversity and equity, etc. In other words, not favoring one religion over another again, though, I only looked at 74 of them. And there are know many organizations or many places around the world where these may explicitly be part of an ethical code of conduct Similarly, with King, or Queen, or Sultan, and Country.

And finally, finally the environment and once again the environment is very rarely mentioned in any ethical codes. The association for computing. Machinery, talks about obligations to society. It's members and the environment surrounding them and the AI higher. I forgot the name of HLEG talks about the obligation to social and environmental well-being, including sustainability and environmental friendliness social impact society and democracy.

Other than that, it's just not there. Which again, is a bit surprising, particularly considering the number of environmental issues that are becoming more prominent in today's society here. Thinking not only about things like the pandemic and other direct and immediate threats to him and health. But also, of course, the ongoing issue of global climate change, the degradation of the environment, the consumption of resources desertification and additional problems.

The extinction of species and here. I might cite Peter Singer again and the general well-being of the environments and all of us who'd well within the environment, virtually no discussion of this in the ethical codes. So I think the ethical codes offer an interesting perspective on who we are offer or who we are obligated to and how we are obligated to them.

I think that it is probably a narrow or perspective than we might think are ethical obligations. Apply generally could be said that these ethical codes apply to professionals only insofar as they are professionals but that allows for a separation between professional ethics and personal ethics. Such that a person could behave in a manner that a person would consider unethical under the auspices or protection of the status of being a professional that race is questions, with respect to accountability and responsibility.

A person might destroy the environment but say, well it's fine. I'm personally in favor of the environment but professionally, I have no obligation to protect it and that's seems to me to be a bit problematic. So it certainly is the case that while a study of analytics and artificial intelligence ethical codes in particular and ethical codes in general provide an insight into the thinking and especially the ethical thinking of professionals in the field.

It is also the case that when we study these, we see, not only the sorts of things they agree on and disagree on. But here, when we look at the objects of ethical obligation, we see fairly significant gaps in their ethical coverage and with an all encompassing technology, like artificial intelligence and analytics, it seems to me that these gaps are in many cases where some of the most significant ethical implications are going to arise.

Certainly, we cannot depend on what has been done so far when talking about the ethics of learning analytics and artificial intelligence, the coverage is simply not complete enough, the considerations simply not broad enough, that's it for this presentation, I'm Steven Downs and look forward to talking next time. The next presentation in the last for this module is a look at the bases for the values and principles that are found in the ethical codes.

In other words, what sort of reasoning and so far is any reasoning at all? Is applied is applied in the creation and justification of the ethical code. So we've looked at should be a good in interesting discussion. I look forward to it until then I'll see you later.

Force:yes