1.In view of adherents of Ethical Egoism, Roger would have given the lincensed software he bought for his Alma Mater fro the royalties of the sale of his book on computer ethics because he would gain some merits in doing so. He would not only gain credits for doing so, he would also be acknowledged for the good deed he has done. Roger would also feel self-fulfilled and satisfied for he knows that he did something good for other people.
Case 1
Adherents of Ethical Altruism would suggest that Roger just made the right move by doing what is just for the good of the common people. He justified the fact that, by giving the software to his Alma Mater, ethics and morality is naturally and mainly concerned for the satisfaction and good of the society as a whole.
Case 2In my opinion, adherents of Ethical Egoism would analyze this situation most likely that Bamba has done these because she knew that she would gain something out of it. She felt that it is wrong to violate her rights as a human being and by knowing it, she feels that it is a dismerits on her part. And having to know the disadvantages it could bring to her life, she had this urge to correct these wrongs and by doing so, she feels safe and feels more protected. And eradicationg these "bad" things out of her way, she keeps herself away from harm.
Almost all adherents of Ethical Altruism would agree that Bamba's plan of sabotaging the whole NBI system in which she believes is violation to human rights, is because of her care for most of other people. She mainly believes that by doing so, she would be able to protect many people from what could be used to harm them. By exposing NBI's violations, she feels that she had lived on the context of the morale and the ethics of the society.
Case 3In any way we look at it, whether adherents of Ethical Egoism of Ethical Altruism, this act is purely unethical and inappropriate in the reason that is violates the rights of other people.
2.Of all the finalist theories, John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism apeals to me most because I do believe that any worth of one's actions is determined solely by its contribution to overall utility or for us to be happy in the end. This is the nature of man. We tend to do things that we know of that could help us or we could gain from it. Whether it would be in material, money or even merits. People tend to believ that these would contribute to solve certain problems or give us satisfaction. In other words, we do these actions in the belief that it would give us happiness.
3.I do believe that John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism seems to prodominate in the world of computing. In the context, as what the definition of Utilitarianism says, human beings tend to do things that makes them happy. As it is written, people has created the world of computing because it would make them happy. People tend to surf the net because it satisfies them, programmers tend to make programs because they would gain something that would make them happy, and customers tend to use these prorams because it would make thier work easier and less tiring. In other words, we use technology because we know that using it satisfies and gives us happiness. Would you research something if you don't want to know it, would you play video games if you don't like it or you have something better to do, would you try technological innovations if your company wouldn't profit from it. You wouldn't, would you?
I tend to disagree with people who criticize Utilitarianism for implying that individuals' interests can be sacrificed for the sake of the "society" or the nation. Modern Utilitarianism suggest that peoples' interest aren't sacrificed for other members of the society. The societyare , ofcourse, just composed of members of the society, and rules and decisions are made for the good of most of individual members of the society. In Other words, the interests aren't given for others, rather, they are given back to us in a different manner. After all, the society's interests are just the sum of all the members' interests.
