A quick reflection on the moral responsibility that Apple should claim for the iPhone’s personal and social effects. Ultimately, I contend that Apple can claim positive moral responsibility, but need not claim negative moral responsibility.
Let me know what you think! This reflection is framed within a business ethics perspective.
Apple Computer certainly holds moral responsibility for the personal and social effects of the iPhone; specifically, Apple holds the positive connotations of moral responsibility, and none of the negative connotations. Apple should hold itself accountable to these personal and social effects by continuing to deliver value-adding hardware, software, and material impact to its consumers. Moral responsibility regards an individual’s “status of morally deserving praise, blame, reward, or punishment for an act or omission, in accordance with one’s moral obligations.”[1] Within this framework, we regard “praise” and “reward” as positive connotations, whereas we regard “blame” and “punishment” as negative connotations. Apple will fit into the role of the “individual,” and the “act” in play is Apple’s introduction and continued provision of the iPhone.
Instead of focusing on Apple’s introduction of the iPhone, and its early development and consequent iterations, we must shift our focus to the last few years of human existence, the present moment, and the impending future. This shift of focus is required so that we can more tangibly understand the macro effects that the iPhone has created on both personal and social levels, which take many years to truly understand. With an established focus on more recent years, the present, and immediate future years, we can break down both the personal and social effects of the iPhone. The iPhone’s three major personal effects include: engagement, knowledge, and time. The iPhone’s three major social effects include: relationship formation, globalization, and empowerment. Each three of the personal effects, and each three of the social effects, are double-edge swords.
Let’s look at the iPhone’s three major personal effects. On an engagement level, consumers of the iPhone either become more technologically engaged with their vocation, their social circles, and their avocation, or they completely disengage from the “real world” by utilizing the iPhone as an escape from reality. On a knowledge level, consumers of the iPhone either leverage the device’s sites and apps to readily enhance their intellectual capacity, or they harm their minds by shortening their attention spans or wasting time consuming immaterial information. On a temporal level, consumers of the iPhone either salvage their time by effectively multitasking, or they misallocate their time by spending too much time on the device without significant value-add.
Let’s now look at the iPhone’s three major social effects. On a relationship formation level, consumers of the iPhone either facilitate their means of initiating and maintaining relationships, or they prioritize their relationships to their devices over human interactions. On a globalization level, consumers of the iPhone either utilize sites and apps to figure out more about the surrounding world, or they stick to their one or two preferred sites/apps and fail to connect with a more diverse virtualized world. On an empowerment level, consumers of the iPhone either equip themselves with a “voice” and an audience for their “brand,” or they outright ignore the capacity of the iPhone to enhance their level of impact on the world.
As we can see from our understanding of the iPhone’s three major personal effects, its three major social effects, and the double-edge nature of these effects, Apple’s overarching moral responsibility for the iPhone’s personal and social effects is complicated and unclear (as are many issues in business ethics). However, as we explored all six specific effects, we continually noticed that the consumer of the iPhone was at the heart of the double-edge sword, not the iPhone itself. This distinction is intentional, and identifies the underlying issue that this report conveys: the consumers of the iPhone, as opposed to the iPhone itself, are wholly responsible for how they use the iPhone and, consequently, have their own moral responsibility in the way they utilize the iPhone in their lives.
Just like a manufacturer of guns cannot be responsible for a consumer’s misuse of its guns, Apple cannot be responsible for a consumer’s misuse of its iPhone. Any misuse of the iPhone falls solely into the hands of the consumer. Therefore, Apple does not hold the negative connotations (blame and punishment) of moral responsibility regarding the iPhone; in fact, the consumer actually holds these negative connotations of moral responsibility based on his/her misuse of the device. Effectively, the negative connotations are shifted from Apple to the consumer simply because the misuse of the device can only be performed by the consumer, and not by the manufacturer.
On the contrary, the positive connotations of moral responsibility regarding the iPhone can be attributed to both Apple and the consumer. The iPhone has incorporated advancements in technology, the network effect, and continued value-add that allows individuals, businesses, and societal groups to synergistically interact with one another in previously unexplored ways. Consumers are able to partner with one another and enhance their professional, personal, and social wellbeing by leveraging the iPhone’s applications, user-friendly interface, and service offerings. Consumers of the iPhone can claim positive connotations of their own moral responsibility, in terms of their iPhone use, if they use the iPhone for the more favorable edges of the swords previously described. Apple can claim its own positive connotations of the moral responsibility for the iPhone simply because, without the invention and digital disruption of the iPhone, consumers would not be able to access the synergies and opportunities that the iPhone provides. Since the iPhone provides a means to which consumers can directly benefit from their use of the iPhone, Apple can certainly claim positive moral responsibility (in this case, praise and rewards) for its introduction of the iPhone.
We have now identified that Apple holds only the positive connotations of moral responsibility associated with the iPhone, while consumers hold their individualized negative connotations and shared positive connotations (if applicable) of moral responsibility associated with the iPhone. With this frame of reference, we can now explore one final topic: what should Apple do about its moral responsibility for the iPhone? In short, Apple should keep doing what it’s been doing since the iPhone was created – invent, innovate, and initiate.
With Apple’s claim to the “praise” and “rewards” of the iPhone’s personal and social effects, all Apple needs to do to maintain its moral responsibility is consistently deliver products, services, and value that consumers can effectively utilize to claim their own positive connotations of moral responsibility for their individualized uses of the iPhone. The interaction between Apple’s moral responsibility for the iPhone, and the consumer’s moral responsibility for his/her (mis)use of the iPhone, certainly impacts just how much praise and how many rewards Apple should receive for the iPhone. Nevertheless, as long as Apple continues to offer value through its products, services, and synergies associated with the iPhone, Apple can assuredly hold itself accountable to maintaining and enhancing its positive moral responsibility for the iPhone’s personal and social effects.
In this report, we’ve discussed the iPhone’s three major personal effects, three major social effects, and impact on the individual consumer. Additionally, we analyzed the positive and negative connotations of moral responsibility, as well as the mutual interactions between Apple and its consumers. We ultimately concluded that Apple only maintains positive moral responsibility for the personal and social effects of the iPhone, and that Apple can sustain this responsibility through value-adding invention, innovation, and initiation. As Apple continues to bite off more than others think it can chew, the iPhone will continue to quench the appetite of personal consumers, businessmen, and societies around the globe.
[1] Klein, Martha (2005). “Responsibility.” In Honderich, Ted. Oxford Companion to Philosophy.
