Alejandre 1

Ivan Alejandre
CST 300L
October 4, 2018
Social Rating – An Ethical Dilemma
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Newton’s second law is a fundamental

part of physics. However, that statement also has meaning in human societies and not only in the

purely physical. If someone treats someone else in a manner that is deemed “bad”, word spreads

to others in the community. Usually, that’s how far it travels. Much like how some communities

have individuals that like to know the business of others, there are groups of people in positions

of power that would like to do the same. The motives driving these groups could be benevolent

or malicious. Technology has given people in positions of power the ability to track the actions

of others and use collected data to persuade or otherwise coerce people into behaving a certain

way. It is entirely possible to construct a surveillance program that tracks online behavior,

financial purchases on and off the internet, the location of individuals, and even monitor their

moods through facial recognition. One country is taking this idea to fruition and that is China.

Why would the government of China have interest in the actions of their constituents?

Over the past century, China has experienced major shifts in political ideology. The

Cultural Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s revolutionized the country towards communism. The

leader of the Communist Party of China (CPC), Mao Zedong, orchestrated this revolution on his

personal beliefs that China should move away from teachings of Confucius to the teachings of

communism (Stanzel, 2016). Despite China being set back economically by the Cultural

Revolution, the country was able to catch up to the rest of the world and become a global leader.

That does not necessarily mean that the lessons from Zedong are forgotten. The country is still

under the leadership of the CPC. The year 2014 is a hallmark in history because in that year, the

Chinese government announced its plans to implement a Social Credit System. Rooted in the
 Alejandre 2

teachings of Confucius, the system will be a “construction of sincerity in government affairs,

commercial sincerity, social sincerity, and judicial credibility” (Chorzempa, Triolo, Sacks,

2018). In 2015, the People’s Bank of China, under control of the CPC, allowed eight financial

companies to begin implementing a social rating system. The CPC have an interest in guiding the

actions of its people in order to improve the public and global image of China. In other words,

they have an idea of how Chinese citizens should conduct themselves in life and while some are

willing to participate, others see the downsides of this system.

Advocates for human rights claim that Sesame Credit is a violation of a person’s privacy

and some believe the system is a tool of coercion instead of a program for incentives. Opponents

claim that the new government policy is too similar to George Orwell’s 1984 which tell of a

society where people are not individual and the differences that make people unique are

handicapped so everyone is more or less the same. If a college student wants to play video games

in their spare time, they should not be penalized for spending a couple days enjoying their

personal liberty and freedom. Charles Rollet reported “Sesame Credit executive Li Yingun said

playing 10 hours of video games a day would get a lower credit score than a responsible parent

buying loads of diapers” (2018). Critics claim if actions committed by an individual only affects

the individual, then they should not be punished. It is in that person’s right and liberty to

voluntarily harm them if they choose to.

As outside observers, a careful breakdown of the situation is crucial before judgment is

passed. There are two sides to every argument and the development of an all-encompassing

system is no exception. On one side, there is the Communist Party of China (CPC). A

government is supposed to create order under a set of ideals agreed upon a society. The Chinese

in general believe that living a good life free of corruption and wrong doing is the correct path.
 Alejandre 3

Deontology is the ethical framework that states “a person will follow his or her obligations to

another individual or society because upholding one’s duty is what is considered ethically

correct” (Chonko). Immanuel Kant’s moral philosophy, rooted in Deontology, was not

necessarily “concerned with what is, but with what ought to be” (Ethics and Morals, n.d.). Kant

also considered the good motive as a central tenant (Ethics and Morals, n.d.). However, Kant’s

philosophy was formulated around how an individual should behave. When this ethical

philosophy is coupled with an approach to authority, the actions and motives of the CPC become

clearer. They are creating this system as a set of rules and guidelines, or policy, in order to give

people a sense of duty. One can say that in their assumption, if citizens follow what the CPC has

laid out as ethically correct, then those citizens would be obligated to follow the law more

closely, and the CPC would consider them more trustworthy and good. There are people in the

world that hold the mindset of following someone in charge and in general, relieved from the

stresses of autonomy. Such people would be happier that someone else is taking the decision-

making process away, allowing them to be more relaxed. They can refer to the law to guide them

in ethical decisions. In the early decades of the CPC, the party attempted to instill a sense of duty

to the people using violent and often brutal physical means. The current party is trying a different

approach to achieve the same goals. Instead of physical punishments and coercion, social rating

puts the moral duty on the individual.

On the other hand, critics and opponents to social rating can be framed under the ethical

philosophy of utilitarianism and relativism. Utilitarianism began as Epicureanism, named after

the Greek philosopher Epicurus. The theory evolved under Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill

in the nineteenth century. Utilitarianism is defined as “the foundation of morals, Utility, or the

Greatest Happiness Principle, which holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to
 Alejandre 4

promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” (Ethics and Morals,

n.d.). When utilitarianism is coupled with relativism – the view that there are no fixed moral

values – arguments against social rating are clearer. Opponents believe that people have the right

and responsibility to act as good people from ideals held from within. Each person should live a

life that is filled with happiness and success because it is their own decisions and actions that led

them to happiness. A set of rewards and punishments set forth by a party of authority clashes

with this position because not everyone wants to be placed in a box and told how to behave. The

assumption is that Chinese people want to have ability to decide of what is right or wrong in their

hands. In addition, the human rights to privacy and autonomy are also a concern. Paul Mozer

reported that “while Chinese culture does not emphasize personal privacy and Chinese internet

users have grown accustomed to surveillance and censorship, the anger represents a nascent, but

growing, demand for increased privacy and data protections online” (2018). Mozer claims that

the current system is too overreaching and actually leaves Chinese adults more vulnerable to

financial fraud as their personal information is available publically. The autonomy of a person in

this system is violated because of the lack of privacy. In other words, the actions of a person are

being limited and if someone wants something to be private, they have to be extremely careful in

what they do online.

The question now is what do the people of China do? Are there more than two options in

this situation? The first call to action is to side with the CPC and allow them to implement the

system as they envision it. From the perspective of the CPC, the people of China look to them for

guidance. Help neighbors with their yard work, donate to charities, and be a responsible parent

not because these actions come from within, but are directives that come from above. If a person

is good, they shall be rewarded, but if the system determines someone to be a detriment to
 Alejandre 5

society, the punishments will be severe. “Brief descriptions of each of these categories are

included . . . yet they shed no light on which particular actions would alter one’s score” (Ahmed

2017). The fact of the matter is the way the current system is being developed is that people have

almost close to no idea what factors or actions are included in the credit score. It is a sort of

black box where the outward function is known, but the internal mechanisms are unknown. This

could be a good or bad thing, depending how it is framed. It prevents exploitation of the system,

but it also leaves it ambiguous and open to corruption.

Citizens of China have another course of action to consider. The majority of opponents of

social rating are people from Western countries who hold different societal ideals and morals

than those from China. Coming back to relativism, what Westerners consider violations of their

morals, Chinese people might not hold similar opinions. Culturally, China tends to value the

community in which they live over the lives and ambitions of the individual. While not

necessarily an opinion boasting the merits of Western credit systems, Adam Greenfield states “as

a de facto reputation index, your credit score strongly conditions where you can rent, what kind

of jobs or educational opportunities you’ll be eligible for, even what mode of travel you use to

get around” (2018). Systems like FICO credit scores offer some resemblance to a social rating.

People with low FICO scores in Western countries can be seen irresponsible or negligent. It

could be said that a purely financial credit score is enough for the CPC to accomplish their goals

of a better China. This system allows privacy of an individual from their neighbors and

countrymen and still holds value as a system of trustworthiness. FICO scores are not a public

resource and it is up the person if they choose to disclose it to others, maintaining privacy and

autonomy.
 Alejandre 6

The Chinese government is attempting a bold experiment in social engineering where the

world should watch with a critical eye. Taking into consideration the pros and cons of each side,

a social rating system might be beneficial overall for China. It is difficult to place oneself into the

mindset of a Chinese citizen. Their upbringing, culture, and history all have effects on how this

system will evolve. China has extensive history living under authoritarian governments and still

lives under one. The social rating system could be abused by those with wealth or political

power. Considering the fact that FICO scores can also be abused, concerns about the Chinese

counterpart are warranted. Taking a point from the opposition ethically, what westerners

consider right and just are not the same to a Chinese person immersed in their culture and way of

life. Outsiders of a society cannot impart their beliefs onto another society and if the majority of

Chinese people are fine with the changes, then we cannot come in between change. Maybe this

system will encourage those who are idle in their life to do more, and guide them towards

fulfillment. It is easy to forgo FICO scores and still live a happy life relative to others who care

more about their credit score. However, if your social rating score is so low that others refuse to

interact with you, the outcome of that scenario is terrifying. There has to be some middle ground

in the development of this radical system and what other countries have. Concerns regarding

privacy can be dealt by limiting who has access to the raw data. The dirty laundry of each person

should not be in a database accessible by all. If the system is to be implemented in a fair way for

most, there has to be concessions and changes to the development.

As people with a different vantage point looking at a potential problem, we see the worst

in what could be. Social rating has the possibility of becoming a corrupted system of control. The

system could become rigid in its ideals and become counter intuitive to the natural evolution of a

society. The world should also remember that the Chinese government already has multiple tools
 Alejandre 7

to suppress dissent and methods of control. What they are trying to do is to make a set of ideals,

goals, and incentives for people to become better versions of themselves. People in other

countries have other methods and ethical guidelines in which they conduct themselves. Maybe

this new way of instilling moral values into a society is right for China and other countries

should watch with a cautious eye at China and their own country to ensure no basic humanitarian

rights are grotesquely violated.

 Alejandre 8

References

Ahmed, Shazeda. (2017, January 24). Cashless Society, Cached Data. Security Considerations

for a Chinese Social Credit System. The Citizen Lab. Retrieved October 7, 2018, from

https://citizenlab.ca/2017/01/cashless-society-cached-data-security-considerations-

chinese-social-credit-system/

Chonko, Larry. (n.d.). Ethical Theories.

Chorzempa, Martin, Triolo, Paul, Sacks, Samm. (2018, June). China’s Social Credit System: A

mark of Progress or a Threat to Privacy? Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Retrieved October 7, 2018, from https://piie.com/system/files/documents/pb18-14.pdf

Ethics and Morals. (n.d.). Handout

Greenfield, Adam. (2018, February 14). China’s Dystopian Tech Could be Contagious. The

Atlantic. Retrieved September 24, 2018, from

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/02/chinas-dangerous-dream-of-

urban-control/553097/

Mozur, Paul. (2018, January 4). Internet Users in China Expect to Be Tracked. Now, They Want

Privacy. NYTimes. Retrieved September 23, 2018, from

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/04/business/china-alibaba-privacy.html

Murrel, Audrey. (2018, July 31). Pushing The Ethical Boundaries of Big Data: A Look At

china’s Social Credit Scoring System. Forbes. Retrieved September 23, 2018, from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/audreymurrell/2018/07/31/pushing-the-ethical-boundaries-

of-big-data-a-look-at-chinas-social-credit-scoring-system/#50ec08c325e5
 Alejandre 9

Rollet, Charles. (2018, June 5). The odd reality of life under China’s all-seeing credit score

system. Wired. Retrieved September 22, 2018, from

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/china-social-credit

Stanzel, Angela. (2016, July 14). Chinese culture after the Cultural Revolution. Asia Dialogue.

Retrieved October 4, 2018, from http://theasiadialogue.com/2016/07/14/chinese-culture-

after-the-cultural-revolution/