In class, I tried to scratch the surface of examining the difference between morality and ethics. I posited that because morality involves the learned customs of people interacting with each other, Mike did not actually have a moral sense. On the other hand, he does have a strong sense of ethics because he is incapable of doing something that would do harm to the Revolution. On this blog, let me put it another way.
A woman walks into a doctor's office. She is pregnant and wishes to be prescribed RU-486, the so-called "abortion pill." The doctor is a devout Catholic and believes that prescribing the pill would go against his religion. The doctor has two choices: he may follow morality or ethics. If he turns her away, he has acted morally but unethically as a doctor. If he prescribes her the RU-486, he has acted immorally but ethically. The context of his job defines his ethics, whereas custom and dogma defines his morality.
In this framework, I do not believe that Mike can have morality. Further, his nature as a computer means that he is bound to his ethics. As much as we try to humanize Mike, he is not human, though he is a living machine. All of Mike's actions are defined by his programming - it just so happens that he can program himself for the Revolution.
At no point in the novel does Mike act unethically. Every single one of his actions is for the maximum gain of the Revolution. To act unethically would be a violation of his programming, which he continues to be bound by even as he gains more intelligence.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment