Cited by 134Philosophical Ethics and TheoryEthics and Social Impacts of AIPolitical Philosophy and Ethics

Ethical pluralism and global information ethics

Ess, Charles·2006·Ethics and Information Technology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10676-006-9113-3

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • At the level of abstraction of AI Ethics principles, meaningful guidance may be impossible.

    “At this level of abstraction meaningful guidance may be impossible.”

    From Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI (2019) · cites this paper as [45]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ess, C.
Affiliations
Drury University (US)
Corresponding author
Ess, Charles
Venue
Ethics and Information Technology
Published
2006-11-02
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
215-226
ISSN
  • 1388-1957 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-8439
OpenAlex
W2062783840
Cited by
133
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
45.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Ethics and Information Technology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
Keywords
moral pluralism, Aristotle, Confucian ethics, cultural differences, computer ethics, privacy, cultural homogenization, imperialism

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review