A Viewing Dynamic that Endures

humans are—and that if we were capable of constructing such a machine, we would be morally obligated to do so. “The question of how we should behave morally can no longer be determined on the basis of our frail biology and failed social systems,” he says. “Thus, it is not such a far-fetched idea that we might have to trust a machine for moral guidance” (p. 207). He ends his chapter, one of two in the book’s closing section on “Emerging Issues in Digital Ethics,” by positing such a machine. He dubs it MorMach (for “moral machine”), in effect a manmade deity to whom deference would constitute the only moral option for its creators. “Most of the world’s population is still looking to invisible and silent gods for instructions on what to do,” Beavers concludes. “MorMach may be our best hope yet, and it will speak in a language that we can clearly understand” (p. 208). So there is much in Digital Ethics to provoke, challenge, and intrigue a reader interested in the largely uncharted territory of digital ethics, especially a reader open to approaching the topic from unfamiliar directions. Despite the inevitable unevenness among the contributions, the book offers more than enough “I never thought of that” moments to make it a worthwhile addition to the media ethicist’s bookshelf. In the end, indeed, it may be the sheer range of novel ideas from other disciplines that are its biggest appeal. Which of those shall we borrow, build on, and learn from in our own media-based enterprises?