Right/Wrong: How Technology Transforms Our Ethics
Authors: Enriquez Juan 
Published: November 2022

RIGHT/WRONG: How Technology Transforms Our Ethics by Juan Enr√≠quez. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2020. 304 pages. Hardcover; $24.95. ISBN: 9780262044424. *Right/Wrong: How Technology Transforms Our Ethics made me angry, made me think, made me research, made me discuss, made me agree, made me disagree¬†... and it turns out that is what the author was hoping for. His goal was to get people interested in ethics again. His point was that "technology provides alternatives that can fundamentally alter our notion of what is right and what is wrong." Ethics, he believes, often do (and should) evolve, and technology is increasingly becoming the catalyst for this evolution. He states that this book is not the classic "scholarly" book that provides answers, but one that he hopes will incite debate and provoke questions regarding the status quo. *As a computer scientist, I expected "technology" to be digital technology, but Enr√≠quez uses a broader, and probably more proper, definition. Though he doesn't provide a formal definition, it appears to be something like "applied scientific knowledge." His definition of technology encompasses birth control, medications, gene editing, machines from the industrial revolution, and lab-grown beef, among other examples. *Enr√≠quez begins the book with examples of what he means by technology influencing what we see as ethical. One example is the advent of birth control. The use of birth control afforded women more opportunities in education and career development. This, in turn, allowed them more financial independence which lessened their need to stay in abusive marriages. Even without the aspect of divorce, today many would look back and see the lack of education and career opportunities for women as unethical treatment. Birth control allowed for and encouraged more-ethical treatment of women. *Enr√≠quez also looks to the future with the more contemporary example of gene editing. Many people today are appalled at the idea of editing a baby's DNA, even with the intent of preventing future diseases. They see it as unethical. Could it be that in the future our kids and grandkids will be appalled at how unethical we were for not editing their genes to avoid the cancer that they now face? *A third example of technology influencing our ethics is related to meat production. Currently, almost all of the meat we consume is a result of raising and slaughtering animals. Present-day technologies, however, allow for lab-grown beef. When this product becomes more affordable and perhaps the norm, will future generations regard us as unethical for the "cruelty-ridden" steaks and burgers that we consumed? *Throughout the book, Enr√≠quez addresses controversial issues, including the educational system, mass incarceration, drug legalization, mental health, climate change, and warfare. There are plenty of topics to use as conversation starters. Unlike other books that help us to see the potential ethical dangers of technology, Enriquez focuses on the ways that technology enables us to become more ethical--if we are willing to adapt. *I love the passion that Enr√≠quez brings to the discussion. He believes that technology without ethics is a recipe for disaster, and he wants people to pay more attention to what is right and wrong. He wants us to be open to re-evaluating what we believe to be right actions if we are given new information or possibilities through technology. At the same time, he wants us to be humble, recognizing that it can be hard to decipher right from wrong in new situations and that it can take time for a society to make the changes necessary to produce more-ethical actions. Hindsight is often 20/20, and people that went before us--even if decent people--made mistakes. We will also make mistakes. Furthermore, there are deterrents to making changes: inconvenience, shame, loss of status, and other costs. He wants to encourage us to be aware, kind, civil, and open when we are considering what is right and wrong given new technology. To all of this, I heartily agree. *In keeping with the author's hopes (that the book would also cause us to disagree, but discuss), I also wanted to mention a few things from the book which troubled me. As previously noted, he tells us that this is not a scholarly book, one meant to prescribe or give answers. Yet, he states that the current healthcare system is unethical, the cost of college is unethical, it is unethical to restrict gay marriage, and the ethical thing to do with autonomous cars is to make them available as soon as they can save more lives than with our current system. Agree or disagree with his conclusions, he is prescribing. He does provide plenty of "answers" throughout the book. *In chapter 3, Enr√≠quez addresses those who would absolutely claim to know right from wrong. One of his main areas of focus is religion. He speaks specifically to people of faith who claim to know right from wrong because they know God's word. He then attempts to show how religious principles too have evolved. He declares, "The religions that survive long-term tend to evolve." Of interest to Christians, he states that "the Bible, the word of God, and hence Christian ethics, has evolved, or been reinterpreted, since the good old days of the Old Testament." He cites examples in which Christian ethics have changed over time. Interpretations of passages in the Bible have altered as our society has changed, and as technology has allowed us to communicate more broadly. He cites how Pope Francis has revised how he speaks about various issues. Agree or disagree, these are interesting topics for research and reflection. *But in his zeal to make his point, Enr√≠quez makes certain statements (e.g., "None of the Gospels were written while Jesus was alive, and none by someone who actually met him") that I don't believe would be accepted by mainstream Christians. Yes, the Gospels were not written when Jesus was on Earth, but it appears that most Christian scholars believe, for example, that the Apostle John wrote the book of John. (Although Enr√≠quez does admit in the references that his citation supporting this statement is from a rather controversial book.) *Finally, the author is trying hard to make this ethics book interesting, far from one of those stodgy, dry ethics theory books "that alienate the general reader" (his words). He accomplishes that, but some help from ethicists could be very beneficial. Very early in the book Enr√≠quez states, "Because we never thought we could come close to doing what we take for granted today, we have no framework to deal with changing ethical norms." The truth is, ethicists have several frameworks available, and Enr√≠quez even uses or suggests a couple of them--perhaps without knowing it. *Near the end of the book, he admonishes the reader to "bring front and center several core principles: modesty, generosity, empathy, civility, humility, compassion, decency, truthfulness ... That is what underlies what we eventually discover to be ethical" (p. 221). This essentially describes what is known as a virtue-ethics framework. Those "core principles" he mentioned are virtues. The virtue-ethics framework simply asks: what would a virtuous person (someone who is compassionate, generous ...) do in this new situation? The second framework is utilitarianism, which asks the question: What would produce the best outcome for the most people? He applies this approach to the authorization of autonomous vehicles and to the discussion of which types of healthcare developments should be prioritized. Both frameworks can be helpful tools for informing tough ethical decisions. *Enr√≠quez brings a wealth of interesting scenarios to this discussion of the future of ethics because of his life experience and work in cutting-edge science. I truly appreciate his desire to write a book that will hold our attention and that is far from a dry textbook on ethics. But the work of those who think about these ideas every day ought to inform the discussion. In glancing through the references, I found only two of hundreds of references that looked to me to be directly related to ethics research. In writing about computer ethics as someone trained in computer science, I have certainly found the literature from those trained in ethics to be enlightening. *This book is an interesting read for those thinking about right and wrong, and this includes people who might not normally be inclined to do so. It can help us realize that we need to re-evaluate frequently and be willing to listen to other points of view with humility. But there is very little information on how to make those tough ethical decisions that we will be continually asked to make. For that, the reader will need to look to other resources. *Reviewed by Lori Carter, Professor of Computer Science, Point Loma Nazarene University, San Diego, CA 92106.