The trouble I see is that we all have different versions of morality. I, for example, believe that tobacco is a positive social good, cigarettes are a social ill and anti-smoking campaigners are utterly despicable; that is the precise opposite of what many people believe: my version of a morality-guiding app would encourage folks to do things that others abhor (and their version would encourage folks to do things I abhor) and discourage folks from doing things they approve of (&c.).
This isn't necessarily a problem--open source apps could be made configurable to aid people in controlling their behavior toward almost any goal, with focus on goals that fall into forms of morality. The most basic forms of this are apps that just provide data--what decisions people make with that data are up to them (although there is an underlying problem of how filtering and presenting data shapes people's decisions). But in a larger sense, a behavioral modification tool could be used equally by pro-smoking and anti-smoking advocates.
It's a bit off-topic, but I'm curious about your pro-smoking stance. Could you give your reasoning? I have some reasons of my own why I'm not as anti-smoking as most people, but I wouldn't go so far as to say tobacco is a social good, and I'm a bit confused by you also saying cigarettes are a social ill.
> This isn't necessarily a problem--open source apps could be made configurable to aid people in controlling their behavior toward almost any goal
True, but even the choices of what to track are themselves important (e.g. if the tool doesn't provide a way to track how often one prays — well, clearly it won't reward pray-ers).
> It's a bit off-topic, but I'm curious about your pro-smoking stance. Could you give your reasoning?
I think that cigars and pipes are conducive to thought and camaraderie; I think that they smell pleasant. They dull appetite, enabling one to go longer between meals. They mask unpleasant odours. They are not terribly bad for one's health, although of course they're not good either, and they do increase cancer. The world would be better if everything smelled of good tobacco smoke.
Cigarettes, OTOH, are typically made from bad tobacco, and paper which stinks. They are much more of an addiction than pipes & cigars are, and they are conducive to addiction. They encourage littering. And they are very carcinogenic.
Personally, I think empowering individuals to control their own lives is an inherent good, so within my personal definition of morality, it makes the world a better place from the start.
However, I'm well aware of the tradeoffs--en masse, individuals will collectively make some pretty stupid decisions (i.e. continuing the destruction of the planet) that might make the world a worse place. We need more than programs that allow personal choice to make the world better--we need education, social change, better laws, funding, etc.
The fact is, there's nobody running the show who could coordinate all of this to ensure that programs that enable personal choice are a net positive. We can only do our part and hope that people in other areas of expertise do their part.
The goal here is to make you happier and more fulfilled as an individual. But beyond that, a happy person imparts more positive energy on those around them, and is often more productive as well. If enough people were able to use such an app to better align their lives with their moral compasses, it's reasonable to expect a net positive impact on society, even if the granular goals vary widely from person to person.
If only there was a moral philosopher who had considered exactly such a scenario. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Ends Though I always think of it as a way to build up societies with generally similar ethical views.
As the author suggests in the article, "Imagine having an application which allowed you to specify what you considered to be an ethical product and what kinds of things you needed or liked."
I like this as a thought provoking piece. The examples seem less than stellar though. It begs the interesting point of the moral value of the Internet.