Respond to this post in 150 words or more agreeing, disagreeing, or giving an opinion.
I find it difficult to believe that the students didn’t have some indication that what they were doing was wrong. I can understand the concern from both sides however, when it comes to hacking it is defined as using a computer to gain unauthorized access to data in a system. No matter how they did it, it was an unauthorized attempt and I do agree with the consequences. The schools have a name to live up to and a reputation of molding magnificent students and leaders and they don’t want to compromise that.
From a Kantian perspective the students would not have had to know the results of their actions to know their actions were wrong. They were also behaving egoistically in trying to do what benefited them and not enduring the end result or consequences. Kant also stresses acting on principle and not on duty. The principle or bottom line is no matter if it was an article on Business Week ans the information was easily obtained the access to the information was done so without permission. Their actions according to Kant did not promote “goodwill” but rather difficulty on the side on the school staff as they had to investigate the issue and take the time to punish the students as well as being inconvenienced by the hack. Kant also defines that in acting with only our self interest in mind and no sense of duty that it has no true moral worth. I believe this is the point that the schools were trying to make. The result of the students benefited no one and they did not want to promote this kind of behavior. If the students don’t find hacking damaging what will the next crime be?