The Influence of Information Technology upon Globalization - Term Paper Example

The Influence of Information Technology upon Globalisation Introduction The amalgamation of the cultures and economies of this world have been described as globalisation. The reason behind this merger has been attributed to technological breakthroughs in transportation and information technology. On account of IT, it has been possible to manage the various components of a business as a single international supply chain[Sch10]. Consequently, a direct interaction has arisen between the people of the world, on account of the economic, social, and technological changes. This has highlighted the striking differences in their specific outlooks towards justice, right, and the good. With regard to the moral-philosophic realm, globalisation produces a basic ambiguity between claims to a universal morality, the explicit ethical assertions of political communities [Lac051]. From a politico-economic point of view, globalisation is characterised by strife betwixt the systemic demands of global markets and the cultural assumptions of various groups. Evidently, this is a contradiction of considerable depth. It consists of the norms of liberalism, such as deregulation, privatisation, democratisation, secularisation, and individual human rights. This is offset by political resistance, repercussion, and fragmentation. These have been observed in civil protest, movements for political independence, terrorism, and xenophobia. These norms of liberalism serve to reiterate the importance of the history of a nation, its culture and territory. In this regard, the foundation of international politics envisage enormous challenges[Lac051]. Nevertheless, the conventional practice of world politics has been discerned to be steeped in moral and ethical questions. In order to address these issues, scholars have to take a stand in the communitarian or cosmopolitan camp. As such, an adequate solution to these issues demands that one be attentive towards, or that an individual make an effort to reconcile cosmopolitan morality and community ethics[Lac051]. Information Technology and Globalisation Cultural and economic globalisation have been facilitated by IT. It can be safely concluded that in the absence of IT, it would have proved impossible to attain the extant levels of globalisation. Therefore, as a crucial enabler of globalisation, IT has been vested with ethical responsibility, with respect to the implementation of globalisation[Sch10]. During the 1970s, IT applications were developed, which made it possible to have in place supply chains. This situation was improved tremendously with the advent of the Internet for commercial use in 1994. Moreover, the use of containers and other such developments in transportation technology, which transpired during the 1950s and 1960s, made it possible to manufacture at one place and to supply the goods so manufactured to the other side of the world. Globalisation admits of several features, such as legal and political factors, in addition to the economic and cultural aspects. None of these elements of globalisation can be considered in isolation, as these aspects tend to be interrelated[Sch10]. For example, economic globalisation compels change in culture, and cultural globalisation forces changes in law and politics. As such, information Technology (IT) enabled globalisation is beset with several problems. These constitute a novel variety of ethical problems, which demand new ethical principles for their resolution. For example, the World Bank and Yahoo in China, can be regarded as ethically globalised institutions. These institutions have raised issues that defy any attempt to resolve them as problems pertaining to the extant nation-states[Sch095]. Globalisation and Ethics Moreover, with regard to globalisation, it is an onerous task to assess cosmopolitan morality or communitarian ethics in isolation. However, it is indispensable to arrive at a reconciliation between these two, despite the much greater difficulty involved. The process of globalisation is accompanied by several problems, including, ethnic conflict, unlawful intervention, economic and social polarisation, regional integration and secession, and the possibility of an imminent environmental disaster. This serves to illustrate that the processes of globalisation are contradictory, in addition to having the capacity to bring about transformation[Lac052]. In this manner, nearly unsurmountable problems are imposed upon communitarians and cosmopolitans, due to globalisation. Non-discrimination in economic policy, respect for human rights, and other universalising standards pose a challenge to the traditional autonomy of nations. Moreover, the concurrent opposition to these norms contests any claim to a general moral order. As such, globalisation dramatically highlights the friction between communitarian and cosmopolitan approaches to world order[Lac052]. Concepts of Morality There are several moral concepts that describe the true values of human life and happiness. In this regard, the opinions of eminent philosophers, such as Epicurus, Rousseau, Kant, Bentham and Mill were analysed. In addition, and compared their opinions with the effects of globalisation on the ethical values of the contemporary world. For example, the Hellenic philosopher Epicurus promoted a rational view of death. He was disparaging of the perspective of death that was common during that epoch. Epicurus emphasised that individuals had to distance themselves from pain via pleasure, and thereby achieve happiness. In addition, he proposed that people should circumvent fear of death, which entailed deprivation of pleasure and severe decrease in the opportunities to attain a life of happiness[Bui12]. In addition, Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an influential philosopher of Geneva. His work was instrumental in bringing about the French Revolution. Rousseau’s work shaped much of the contemporary educational, political and social thinking. He was given to stressing upon the difference between true virtue and the virtue of societies that had been greatly affected by cultural and scientific developments. It was his considered opinion that such societies did not support true virtue, and that they merely extolled shallow customs, which were in essence nothing more than protocol[Del091]. The members of such societies are praised for their sartorial elegance and perceived cultural superiority, whilst ignoring or even deriding farmers and others who are truly the salt of the earth. Such is the hypocrisy of people, which was mercilessly exposed by Rousseau. Farmers, despite their paucity of fine raiment or familiarity with the so called finer things of life, possess the truly important virtues. For instance, they are independent, strong, and have the least regard for the frivolous things of life, such as, social status. These people have a much greater affinity with nature[Del091]. Rousseau’s thought was characterised by its underlying emphasis upon the proximity of nature and virtue. Moreover, the eminent philosopher Kant proposed that universalised maxims could generate contradictions. For example, some actions were such that their maxim could by no stretch of the imagination be regarded as a universal law of nature, without engendering contradiction. However, some actions were such that they did not include such internal impossibility. All the same, it was not possible to consider their maxim to be a universal law of nature, as this would lead to a contradiction in itself[Kor85]. According to Kant, all universalised maxims are replete with contradictions. As such, there was no universal law of nature that was devoid of incongruity. In addition, the utilitarian principle of Bentham can be comprehended by understanding the principle of composition. The latter relates to the character of the function that underlies the welfare of the community, public utility, and the welfare of the individual members of that community. Classical utilitarianism can be regarded as the welfare of the community or the overall welfare of the individual members. Such net welfare is to be assessed in terms of positive and negative valence, namely pleasure and pain. In addition, it has to be regarded impartially, in order to provide the very same importance. According to this perspective, social welfare can be encouraged only when actions and institutions are selected and constructed in a manner that maximises the net sum of aggregated pains and pleasures. From this point of view, the principle of composition necessitates the summation of the pains and pleasures of all the people affected by actions, laws and policies[Pos06]. From the perspective of composition of social welfare, the principle of choice is one of maximisation, and the principle of utility enjoins that the alternative to be selected should be the one that results in the largest net sum of pleasure. John Stuart Mill’s work, per se, was not limited to those dealing with the mental state, to the exclusion of pleasurable activities. Subsequent to declaring that happiness connotes the presence of pleasure and the absence of pain; Mill struck a note of warning. As such, he cautioned that much more had to be explored, especially with regard to what was included in the ideas relating to pain and pleasure[Sau10]. This indicated a departure from a stance founded on Bentham’s theory. Furthermore, he emphasised that desirable objects were desirable due to the pleasure that they encompassed in themselves, or as being entities that promoted pleasure and prevented pain. Thus, a distinction was drawn between objects that were desirable in themselves, on account of the pleasure inherent in them, from the objects that were nothing more than devices that assisted in the promotion of pleasure. The major departure of Mill, with respect to Bentham, consists of the qualitative differentiation between pleasures. From the perspective of Bentham, every activity has to be evaluated on the basis of the amount of pleasure that it produced. This being a measure of the intensity and duration of the pleasure produced[Sau10]. Consequently, when the quantum of pleasure is the same, the source of the pleasure has scant bearing upon the value of the pleasure. Mill proposed that hedonistic utilitarianism had the capacity to include the finer things in life. Moreover, in his monumental “Being and Nothingness”, Sartre provided an extraordinary formulation of absolute freedom. The latter was deemed by him to be rendered feasible, via a process of totalisation, wherein the principle of choice was made unqualified and comprehensive. However, such a totalising picture denotes a type of imprisonment. This tends to be inevitable and everything encountered reduces to a function of this[Fal03]. This totalising picture is such that nothing can be understood without reference to it. The impracticality of this abstraction was evident, even to Sartre, who endeavoured to describe freedom as being embodied and specific to a particular situation. However, he was circumscribed by his commitment to the totalising concept of freedom. His emphasis upon an in-itself and other, which reside external to the self, fails to circumvent the prison of freedom[Fal03]. According to Sartre, the connotation of the social and natural reals is such that it does not provide a context to freedom. On the other hand, it perpetuates its absoluteness. In the final analysis, these are rendered subordinate to freedom. In this manner, the concept of freedom proposed by Sartre can persist as a comprehensive and absolute entity. However, it cannot evade being inhumanly abstract simultaneously. Furthermore, Hobbes in his “Leviathan” had made some interesting conjectures. He had declared that rights were not associated with corresponding duties. A condemned subject is entitled to resist the punishment inflicted upon him by the sovereign. However, the sovereign is not constrained by this, and can exercise its right to punish a condemned person. There is a certain amount of dichotomy in this situation. The right of the sovereign to punish is hindered by the right of the condemned person to resist such punishment. Hobbes has been adamant in his support for the absolute primacy of the right of self-defence[Yat14]. In addition, he had promoted the view that the sovereign does not possess a right to punish. As such, the right to punish is the outcome of relinquishment of non-defensive natural rights. Thus, Mexican farmers who find it infeasible to compete with the subsidised agribusinesses of the US are compelled to change into manufacturing labourers or to undertake illegal immigration to the US. Due to cultural globalisation, child labour and the assaulting of females has become unacceptable[Sch10]. Thus, globalisation produces beneficial, as well as harmful effects. These are some of the reasons behind the emergence of globalisation as a contested concept. Strictly speaking, globalisation constitutes a form of human social cooperation that is distinguished by negative and positive features. It would be an exercise in futility to attempt to establish globalisation, per se, as being good or bad in itself. Such an endeavour would be akin to trying to prove that human social cooperation is good or bad in itself[Sch10].It has rightly been asserted that human social cooperation has resulted in a lifestyle that has been significantly transformed by technology. This novel lifestyle has brought about a significant improvement in the lifestyle of many people. Furthermore, human social cooperation has had its share of malevolence[Sch10]. It has generated unimaginable evils, such as wars and the potential destruction of the ecosystem. Similarly, globalisation has created several benefits and disadvantages. For instance, within globalisation, IT creates novel problems. Thus, in the year 2002, Yahoo furnished the Chinese government with information relating to journalists who supported democracy. As a result, these individuals were imprisoned and subjected to torture. Subsequently, these journalists claimed damages from Yahoo. The ethical issue emerging from this incident was whether Yahoo had been justified in providing such information, and whether it should have complied with the law that ignored fundamental human rights. This raises the all-important query, as to the law of which nation a transnational company should follow. The answer to this question is made all the more difficult, with regard to an IT company. In the context of outsourced manufacturing, it would seem appropriate to comply with the law of the nation where the operations transpire. This clarity was absent, in the Yahoo incident, despite the sale of its Chinese e-mail operation to a company of China[Sch10]. At this juncture, it is important to note that during the 2007 annual meeting, Yahoo shareholders voted against its proposal to reject censorship. As a corporation, Yahoo is constrained by the vote of its shareholders. However, the question remains, whether the final say in any matter rests with the shareholders of transnational corporations[Sch10]. It is undeniable that IT has created ethical globalised companies, with respect to Internet communications companies, such as Yahoo. The ethical problems of these companies cannot be resolved by splitting them between various countries. As such, the contemporary age is witness to the unprecedented integration of national economies into what can be regarded as a solitary international marketplace. Globalisation has thus been as overwhelming as the Industrial Revolution. In addition to integrating marketplaces, across the world, globalisation has brought about the harmonisation of the marketplace ethos[Bar082]. Conclusion IT has transformed the world into a wired or networked society. The contemporary world is distinguished by the swift dissemination of information and almost instantaneous communications. This transformation has gradually rendered location irrelevant. As a consequence, people have greater moral responsibility for the welfare of each other. The days of claiming ignorance regarding the cascading effects of one’s action and decisions have come to an end. There is easy access to information, and the enhanced knowledge has culminated in an increase in moral responsibility. The threshold relating to moral failures has been substantially lowered. In addition, globalisation has vastly increased the capacity to accumulate surplus, which has come to be regarded as commonplace and an anticipated consequence of economic life. Several eminent philosophers had analysed the real values of human life and happiness. For instance, Epicurus had stated that attaining happiness in life was possible only through the elimination of the fear of death. It was his considered opinion that a person should be free from pains and pressures. However, in the contemporary world, such painless pleasure cannot be attained, due to the largely uncontrollable influences and interventions of globalisation. Moreover, Rousseau had accorded greater value to virtues and had vehemently decried the hypocrisy of the artificial world. All the same, the fact remains that in the contemporary age, artificial values reign supreme. Significantly, Kant had opined that universalised maxims, without exception, were steeped in contradiction. As such, there was no universal law of nature that was devoid of incongruity. Moreover, Bentham believed that utilitarianism was an important component of the societal norms. Every item was to be evaluated on the basis of its utility value. In these days of globalisation, such discretion cannot be exercised, due to the overt intrusion of the Internet into the lives of the people. Thus, it can be surmised that information technology pervades the moral arena of the globalised world, in a manner that relegates ethical concerns to the background. References Sch10: , (Schultz, 2010, p. 354), Lac051: , (Lachapelle, 2005, p. 605), Sch10: , (Schultz, 2010, p. 353), Sch095: , (Schultz, 2009, p. 1), Lac052: , (Lachapelle, 2005, p. 619), Bui12: , (Buitrago, 2012, p. 457), Del091: , (Delaney, 2009, p. 12), Kor85: , (Korsgaard, 1985, p. 25), Pos06: , (Postema, 2006, p. 111), Sau10: , (Saunders, 2010, p. 55), Sau10: , (Saunders, 2010, p. 66), Fal03: , (Falzon, 2003, p. 135), Fal03: , (Falzon, 2003, p. 136), Yat14: , (Yates, 2014, p. 233), Sch10: , (Schultz, 2010, p. 355), Bar082: , (Barrera, 2008, p. 291), Read More

Globalisation admits of several features, such as legal and political factors, in addition to the economic and cultural aspects. None of these elements of globalisation can be considered in isolation, as these aspects tend to be interrelated[Sch10]. For example, economic globalisation compels change in culture, and cultural globalisation forces changes in law and politics. As such, information Technology (IT) enabled globalisation is beset with several problems. These constitute a novel variety of ethical problems, which demand new ethical principles for their resolution.

For example, the World Bank and Yahoo in China, can be regarded as ethically globalised institutions. These institutions have raised issues that defy any attempt to resolve them as problems pertaining to the extant nation-states[Sch095]. Globalisation and Ethics Moreover, with regard to globalisation, it is an onerous task to assess cosmopolitan morality or communitarian ethics in isolation. However, it is indispensable to arrive at a reconciliation between these two, despite the much greater difficulty involved.

The process of globalisation is accompanied by several problems, including, ethnic conflict, unlawful intervention, economic and social polarisation, regional integration and secession, and the possibility of an imminent environmental disaster. This serves to illustrate that the processes of globalisation are contradictory, in addition to having the capacity to bring about transformation[Lac052]. In this manner, nearly unsurmountable problems are imposed upon communitarians and cosmopolitans, due to globalisation.

Non-discrimination in economic policy, respect for human rights, and other universalising standards pose a challenge to the traditional autonomy of nations. Moreover, the concurrent opposition to these norms contests any claim to a general moral order. As such, globalisation dramatically highlights the friction between communitarian and cosmopolitan approaches to world order[Lac052]. Concepts of Morality There are several moral concepts that describe the true values of human life and happiness.

In this regard, the opinions of eminent philosophers, such as Epicurus, Rousseau, Kant, Bentham and Mill were analysed. In addition, and compared their opinions with the effects of globalisation on the ethical values of the contemporary world. For example, the Hellenic philosopher Epicurus promoted a rational view of death. He was disparaging of the perspective of death that was common during that epoch. Epicurus emphasised that individuals had to distance themselves from pain via pleasure, and thereby achieve happiness.

In addition, he proposed that people should circumvent fear of death, which entailed deprivation of pleasure and severe decrease in the opportunities to attain a life of happiness[Bui12]. In addition, Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an influential philosopher of Geneva. His work was instrumental in bringing about the French Revolution. Rousseau’s work shaped much of the contemporary educational, political and social thinking. He was given to stressing upon the difference between true virtue and the virtue of societies that had been greatly affected by cultural and scientific developments.

It was his considered opinion that such societies did not support true virtue, and that they merely extolled shallow customs, which were in essence nothing more than protocol[Del091]. The members of such societies are praised for their sartorial elegance and perceived cultural superiority, whilst ignoring or even deriding farmers and others who are truly the salt of the earth. Such is the hypocrisy of people, which was mercilessly exposed by Rousseau. Farmers, despite their paucity of fine raiment or familiarity with the so called finer things of life, possess the truly important virtues.

For instance, they are independent, strong, and have the least regard for the frivolous things of life, such as, social status. These people have a much greater affinity with nature[Del091].

Read More