Commons-Based Peer Production and Virtue - Research Paper Example

Commons-Based Peer Production and VirtueNissenbaum and Benkler (2006) see commons-based peer production as “a socio-economic system of production that is emerging in the digitally networked environment.” With the outsoaring of computers and the internet and its wide usage, it has become extremely necessary that users of computers and the internet play contributing roles in developing and maintaining software and programs. In the view of Nissenbaum and Benkler however, the freedom given to the public to participate must be guided by certain principle and virtues.

In writing Commons-based Peer Production and Virtue, the writers are careful not to use any existing theories or principles. The first virtue discussed by the writers is put under cluster I which is named autonomy, independence and liberation. In the view of Nissenbaum and Benkler (2006), though commons-based peer production give users the freedom to contribute freely from the privacy of their homes, it is extremely necessary that such independence, liberation and autonomy are respected in “our actions and choices as well as from the typical array of institutional entities, whether employers, banks, agents of government, or whoever.

”The writers also touch on creativity, productivity and industry. There is no denying fact this is an area in commons-based peer production that so much is needed from the contributor to show virtue and ethics. This assertion is judged from the fact that contributors are hardly coached or monitored. “Peer production offers a medium for contributing our thoughts, our knowledge, our know-how, or merely the spare cycles of our PCs toward a meaningful product” (Nissenbaum and Benkler, 2006).

Such freedom to be personal puts a lot of challenge on contributors to stand out tall with their level of creativity and productivity to ensure that standard is maintained in the industry. There are then the virtues of benevolence, charity, generosity, altruism. The writers believe that contributors should have an inner-judging ethics that should tell them that their effort and production are being undertaken as a form of social benevolence. For this reason, it is important to attach to it all needed commitment and dedication.

The final group of virtues touched by the writers has to do with sociability, camaraderie, friendship, cooperation, civic virtue. In this direction, Nissenbaum and Benkler (2006) state that “in this cluster, the virtues also imply giving, but the open-hearted contribution is to a commons, a community, a public, a mission, or a fellowship of which the giver is a part, and the giving dimension might be only one aspect of it.” These virtues assure the contributor that he or she is part of the society that is going to benefit from the inputs he or she makes.

It therefore becomes necessary that the contributor have a sense of purpose, of which he or she is part. This sense of purpose would lead the contributor to giving off such quality and moral standard would benefit the society of which he or she is part.To conclude, it is right to that the virtues discussed by Nissenbaum H and Benkler Y are in the right direction and very important. The decision to remain neutral with theories makes their suggestions less controversial and more embracing. If contributors to peer productions are going to but the virtues into practice, the world, which is seen today as a global village, with people dependent on each other is going to become more and more acceptable and humane place to live in even as commons-based peer productions live on.

Reference ListNissenbaum H and Benkler Y, “Commons-Based Peer Production and Virtue” The Journal of Political Philosophy: Volume 14, Number 4, 2006, pp. 394–419. 2006