section 1

1251 Words3 Pages

Snowden’s actions encompass level two and four of Kohlberg’s moral development. In stage two “one acts” on personal interest and supports individualism ("Kohlberg's Moral Stages." xx). However, for the NSA, Snowden should have acted in closer regards to stage four which focuses on social systems and conscience in his allegiance to the organization. Stage four supports the desired actions on Snowden’s behalf by “fulfilling the duties to which he had agreed and upholding the law” ("Kohlberg's Moral Stages." xx). The preceding supports the argument of why Snowden is a thief and traitor with respect to the NSA, nonetheless it also fails to support the autonomy which is valued within our society and has been a large part of our democratic values of freedom since the United States inception. Whistleblower and Patriot The rebuttal to the Snowden’s labeling as a whistleblower and patriot stems from the same ethical theory’s that would label him as a traitor and thief. The preceding is indicative of ethical dilemma which encompasses this case. Snowden’s work involved a large amount of responsibility in safe guarding the information that he had access to. Nonetheless, the information Snowden attained conflicted with the morals, reasoning and values that Snowden holds as an individual. The preceding traits are awarded with the same decency by many individuals within our society and this is why many people support Snowden’s actions. From a deontological standpoint Snowden acted in the correct way by acting in a way that supported the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This is validated by the statements Snowden made on his actions. This theory fails to take into account the adverse consequences of Snowden’s actions on th... ... middle of paper ... ...him to also take into account the duty he had to the American citizens which feel that an invasion of privacy is unethical. In leaking the information and making the supporting parties aware of their invasion of privacy Snowden justifies his actions by fulfilling his duty in safeguarding the right to privacy of the affected parties. Once again when Snowden actions are viewed from an ethical lense of moral relativism they are justified due to the importance of privacy place on the effected parties who are monitored by the NSA. The vagueness and simplistic application of moral relativism is precisely why this approach is less commonly debated. The opposite continuum of circumstances which would label Snowden a whistleblower in regards to his supportive group are the same circumstances which his non-supporters use to discredit his actions when applying the theory of

Open Document