Is profiting off of ignorance unethical?

[Old Peculier]

all I do is talk it up like it's impressive even though it's definitely an old computer.

The OP clearly states that the seller has deliberately presented the computer as being more impressive than it is, and since he has not lied it is implied that this has been done with use of rhetoric.

It follows that the seller has deliberately attempted to make the product more appealing than it ought to be, which I consider unethical in that the seller has deliberately influenced the buyer to make a poor purchase.

Consider: if you gave the same description to your friend, to buy from someone else, would you believe that to be sound advice? (Keeping in mind that you are deliberately neglecting to mention details which you think your friend would not know). Would it be ethical give unsound advice to a friend? Would it be ethical to give unsound advice to a someone else?

[Darth Tanner]

But the sellers only duties are to sell the product, to tell the buyer about the facts and specifications of the product and to answer the buyers questions truthfully.

In your opinion that is the seller's only duty and in your opinion he only has to obey the letter of the proposition, not the spirit. As long as he doesn't directly state a falsehood, misleading and decieving the buyer is fine. That's your position. It's clear. It's also a sign you're a moral leper.

So if you were selling something, say an old toy (we shall assume its in perfect condition) and someone offered you £50 for it when you know full well that you can buy it new for £30 you would tell them to go buy it new from a shop, sacrificing your ability to sell the toy at a proft?

The stupidity of the customer has no bearing on your own morality.

A good example of this are the people who are getting heavily into debt with credit cards. Why is it the banks fault these people are stupid enough to take out a 17% credit card loan for luxuary goods when 3% loans are available from other banks. Its not, its the customers lack of inteligence to look after their own finance.

I can see how you may feel uncomfortable taking advantage of other peoples stupidity, and i'll admit ive been had by this sort of thing a couple of times, but this was down to my own stupidity, i dont feel that they acted illegaly/immoraly. (well okay i did at the time)

[Gil Hamilton]

"Its a pentium 3 with <#> mhz, it comes with a <size> monitor. The case itself is very clean, and has always been reliable. I never had any problems with it. I'll be able to deliver it with its harddrive wiped clean and <insert whatever software you are giving away with it.> It originally retailled for $2000 but I am selling it for $500"

Let's actually analyze this statement.

"Its a pentium 3 with <#> mhz, it comes with a <size> monitor"
Stating what can be read on the box, but it is deceptive because Pentium 3s were coming in their own when I was in highschool, back in the late 90s, and passing it off with implication that it is good.

"The case itself is very clean, and has always been reliable. I never had any problems with it."
Aside from the fact that it would be a really shitty computer store if this is not true, this is a non piece of information. The case of a computer has the main function of keeping shit out of your computer. Saying it's always been reliable and you've never had any problems with it translates to "We haven't put a giant gouge in it yet" That is deceptive because it has fuck all to do with anything and is true of any computer. It's selling a point that is completely a Barnum statement.

"I'll be able to deliver it with its harddrive wiped clean and <insert whatever software you are giving away with it.>"
Gee golly gosh, that's mighty good of you, considering that's true of all your products. Deception for the same reason as the last item, it is true of all products and therefore a Barnum statement.

"It originally retailled for $2000 but I am selling it for $500."
Lying through omission. The implication here is that you are giving the buyer a really good deal, but in fact are probably completely overcharging him for a P3. It likely did retail for 2000 bucks... back in the late 90s, but what it retailed for back then is irrelevant.

All in all, you made a list of completely deceptive points. That is being dishonest if there is a use for the word. Honesty isn't about stating facts, it's about stating facts in a truthful and relevant way, and not in a deceptive way. What that is is completely dishonest salesmanship.

It reminds me of those posters that were hanging up around campus that stated that 80% of Edinboro students were making the choice not to smoke marijuana. Which is a factual statement. However, what makes it dishonest is that it implies that that is alot of students, more than average. If you flip the number to read 20% of Edinboro students DO smoke marijuana, IE 1 out of 5, which is well more than average for Pennsylvania and certainly more than the town it is situated in. That makes the statement dishonest and an exercise in spin.

[Imperial Overlord]

The stupidity of the customer has no bearing on your own morality.

This is the relevant point. Whether the customer is smart or stupid, attempting to decieve him is immoral. You don't have an obligation to send your customer to somewhere else where he can get something cheaper, but you do have an obligation not to misrepresent what you're selling.

[aerius]

The seller hasn't provided a full disclosure of the facts, key word, full. He's lying by omission, that is unethical.

But with that said I'm probably not going to lose much sleep over it, the buyer should've done his research to figure out the market price on whatever the hell he's buying. With the easily availabe resources these days there's no excuse for going in blind.

[wolveraptor]

You don't gain the right to screw someone over just because that person is ignorant through apathy, or possibly even inability. If that were the case, half of the world would automatically become sub-human, without the same ethical standing as intellectuals. Since ethics are ideally designed to protect human society and individuals, this would be unacceptable.

[LongVin]

"Its a pentium 3 with <#> mhz, it comes with a <size> monitor"
Stating what can be read on the box, but it is deceptive because Pentium 3s were coming in their own when I was in highschool, back in the late 90s, and passing it off with implication that it is good.

Its not deceptive because thats what the thing has. If you said "yeah its the state of the art Pentium 3" Thats deceptive.

"The case itself is very clean, and has always been reliable. I never had any problems with it."
Aside from the fact that it would be a really shitty computer store if this is not true, this is a non piece of information. The case of a computer has the main function of keeping shit out of your computer. Saying it's always been reliable and you've never had any problems with it translates to "We haven't put a giant gouge in it yet" That is deceptive because it has fuck all to do with anything and is true of any computer. It's selling a point that is completely a Barnum statement.

I meant that as the computer itself has always been reliable as in it works and serves the function of being a computer. I should of worded that better.

"I'll be able to deliver it with its harddrive wiped clean and <insert whatever software you are giving away with it.>"
Gee golly gosh, that's mighty good of you, considering that's true of all your products. Deception for the same reason as the last item, it is true of all products and therefore a Barnum statement.

Actually since its a used computer being sold by a classified ad(as in the original example) there is no gurantee you will get a software package with it.

Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 9:14 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LongVin wrote:
"Its a pentium 3 with <#> mhz, it comes with a <size> monitor. The case itself is very clean, and has always been reliable. I never had any problems with it. I'll be able to deliver it with its harddrive wiped clean and <insert whatever software you are giving away with it.> It originally retailled for $2000 but I am selling it for $500"

Let's actually analyze this statement.

"Its a pentium 3 with <#> mhz, it comes with a <size> monitor"
Stating what can be read on the box, but it is deceptive because Pentium 3s were coming in their own when I was in highschool, back in the late 90s, and passing it off with implication that it is good.

"The case itself is very clean, and has always been reliable. I never had any problems with it."
Aside from the fact that it would be a really shitty computer store if this is not true, this is a non piece of information. The case of a computer has the main function of keeping shit out of your computer. Saying it's always been reliable and you've never had any problems with it translates to "We haven't put a giant gouge in it yet" That is deceptive because it has fuck all to do with anything and is true of any computer. It's selling a point that is completely a Barnum statement.

"I'll be able to deliver it with its harddrive wiped clean and <insert whatever software you are giving away with it.>"
Gee golly gosh, that's mighty good of you, considering that's true of all your products. Deception for the same reason as the last item, it is true of all products and therefore a Barnum statement.

"It originally retailled for $2000 but I am selling it for $500."
Lying through omission. The implication here is that you are giving the buyer a really good deal, but in fact are probably completely overcharging him for a P3. It likely did retail for 2000 bucks... back in the late 90s, but what it retailed for back then is irrelevant.

Keyword: ORIGINALLY. I am not saying "It sells for 2000 but I'll give it away for 500." I am implying that at one time it was 2000 but now it is being sold for less.

[Darth Servo]

I talk up the computer (it's "very clean", always been very reliable, complete with monitor, throw out a bunch of technojargon), but I do not lie to this prospective buyer; all I do is talk it up like it's impressive even though it's definitely an old computer.

Sounds EXACTLY what politicians and most advertising gurus do. Is there any question that those two things are unethical?

[LMSx]

I was agreeing with you Longvin until I re-read the original post.

Its not deceptive because thats what the thing has. If you said "yeah its the state of the art Pentium 3" Thats deceptive.

This someone quickly reveals that they are not very computer literate, and so I talk up the computer (it's "very clean", always been very reliable, complete with monitor, throw out a bunch of technojargon), but I do not lie to this prospective buyer; all I do is talk it up like it's impressive even though it's definitely an old computer.

He's talking up the computer, making the buyer believe it's a deal; he's not just making a classified listing of parts. That's unethical.

[LongVin]

Well when you are selling something you are always going to talk it up. Salesmanship is how you present the product. If you go around saying "Yeah this sucks..." no one will want to buy it.

[Imperial Overlord]

Well when you are selling something you are always going to talk it up. Salesmanship is how you present the product. If you go around saying "Yeah this sucks..." no one will want to buy it.

There's a difference between talking it up and presenting its good points "yes you can word process, internet, and do your taxes on it if you want" and tricking someone into believing it is a top of the line machine.

[aerius]

Well when you are selling something you are always going to talk it up. Salesmanship is how you present the product. If you go around saying "Yeah this sucks..." no one will want to buy it.

There's a reason salesmen are generally regarded as worthless lying scumbags.

[LMSx]

Well when you are selling something you are always going to talk it up. Salesmanship is how you present the product. If you go around saying "Yeah this sucks..." no one will want to buy it.

So it's totally ethical to prey upon a computer illiterate person by tossing out information that makes it seem impressive when it's not but unethical to actually outright say "this is a good computer". Perfect semantic hair-splitting.

[Darth Wong]

Well when you are selling something you are always going to talk it up. Salesmanship is how you present the product. If you go around saying "Yeah this sucks..." no one will want to buy it.

Ah, the "common practice" ethical argument. By this tortured logic, lawyers and politicians never do anything unethical either, because that's just what they do.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Well when you are selling something you are always going to talk it up. Salesmanship is how you present the product. If you go around saying "Yeah this sucks..." no one will want to buy it.

Ah, the "common practice" ethical argument. By this tortured logic, lawyers and politicians never do anything unethical either, because that's just what they do.

That logic sounds very... circular.

[Glocksman]

Somewhat related to this is the dilemma I have over what to charge people to fix their PC's who aren't close friends or family.
For example, a woman at work wanted me to upgrade her Inspiron 4100 laptop by adding 512 megs of memory, a larger hard drive, and wireless networking.

I had a Seagate 5400 rpm 40GB laptop drive in my parts bin with over 3 years of warranty left on it that I wanted $50 for.
Memory came out to $75 or so for 2 good Kingston SODIMM's.
She also lucked out in that the machine had a working mini-PCI slot with antenna leads, so I ordered a $25 Intel b/g card instead of a $50+ external Cardbus adapter.

I told her it'd be $50 for the drive, the cost of the memory and wireless card from newegg, and $70 to install the hardware and do a fresh install of the OS after backing up her Documents folder from the old drive.
It all came to $231 and change.
Replacing the hardware took about 10 minutes and installing and patching the OS up to date took another 45 minutes or so.

I just feel kind of odd (almost like I'm cheating them) charging someone $70 for less than an hour's work, and work that I enjoy doing to boot.
However. she was happy to pay the price and said I was much cheaper than Best Buy.
I was curious so I looked it up at their Geek Squad site and found they would have charged almost $190 for the labor alone.

I guess she was happy at my $70 labor charge.
Not to mention that BB doesn't even come close to what newegg charges for the parts.

[2000AD]

This is really just one step away from those newspaper stories you read about cowboy builders fleecing old people of their life savings.

It's still in the greyzone since people will argue that the buyer should be asking the right questions, but this is one of the reasons why salepeople are looked on as weasels.

[Lord Zentei]

While economics is by itself no guarantee to acheive a moral solution, one should nonetheless give it some heed.

According to economic models, competitive free trade markets are the most efficient way of maximizing the sum of consumer surplus plus producer profit for a wide range of goods and services.

However: economic models require amongst other things the precondition that both parties have complete information about the transaction before it takes place. Hence the importance of truth in advertising laws, consumer protection groups and freedom of information (amongst other things): without accurate information and the ability to act on it free markets cannot optimize the economy. If falsehood in advertising were permitted and widespread, the market, and by extension the economy, would suffer.

[LongVin]

Well when you are selling something you are always going to talk it up. Salesmanship is how you present the product. If you go around saying "Yeah this sucks..." no one will want to buy it.

Ah, the "common practice" ethical argument. By this tortured logic, lawyers and politicians never do anything unethical either, because that's just what they do.

They can(and do) do things unethically but it depends on the situation.

Same thing with salesman.

You have to promote the product by hitting the goodpoints. You aren't going to mention bad things about the product because then it won't get sold. Your job as a salesman is to present the product in a way in which the person thinks they can't live without it, even if they don't need it. And if you do that by not outrightly lieing to the person then its ethical.

[Darth Wong]

You have to promote the product by hitting the goodpoints. You aren't going to mention bad things about the product because then it won't get sold. Your job as a salesman is to present the product in a way in which the person thinks they can't live without it, even if they don't need it. And if you do that by not outrightly lieing to the person then its ethical.

So you figure that dishonesty is OK as long as you don't "outright lie"? Are you prepared to defend this logic in the working examples that people are bound to throw your way?

If I sell you a drug and "forget" to tell you about horrible side effects, is that ethical? According to what you just said, it's completely ethical.

[LongVin]

Its not being dishonest. In the example given with the computer there is no dishonesty. You are promoting the computer and citing its good points and emphasing on those but in no way is that being dishonest.

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

Its not being dishonest. In the example given with the computer there is no dishonesty. You are promoting the computer and citing its good points and emphasing on those but in no way is that being dishonest.

Yes, it fucking is. You're overplaying its good bits, downplaying that fact that it's old shit, and lying by omission information that would be useful to your customer so he can make an unbiased decision.

[Ariphaos]

There is so much to know in the world that yes, I feel that exploiting ignorance is generally unethical. Preying on lack of knowledge is highly unethical.

Preying on lack of ability to comprehend might be different entirely. I'm very tempted to start up a modern art store filled with such rare elegancies as a picture of a peice of steaming pizza ona fork.

[Darth Wong]

Its not being dishonest. In the example given with the computer there is no dishonesty. You are promoting the computer and citing its good points and emphasing on those but in no way is that being dishonest.

You're full of shit. Failing to tell people about problems is absolutely dishonest, and in fact, if a drug company does it, it's actually illegal. It's also against the Engineering Ethics Code, the Medical Ethics code, and virtually any other professional ethics code I can think of. The only reason it's not against the Salesman's Ethics Code is that there is no such code.

I noticed you chose to totally ignore the drug example that I provided in my last post. Could it be that you ignored it because it completely demolished your flimsy argument?

[LongVin]

Its not being dishonest. In the example given with the computer there is no dishonesty. You are promoting the computer and citing its good points and emphasing on those but in no way is that being dishonest.

Yes, it fucking is. You're overplaying its good bits, downplaying that fact that it's old shit, and lying by omission information that would be useful to your customer so he can make an unbiased decision.

The customer should know enough to ask the proper questions to the salesman about the performance or atleast perform some research on the subject matter.

As the salesman all I know is the guy wants a computer. The Computer though old works, it can be used for most things people use computers for, word processing, email, internet, printing. I am selling the computer for general use, unless the person specifically goes "Yeah I want to play games on this, is this good for games?" then I would say "nah its not good for that."

I'm not going to come out and say "oh yeah this computer is old and you can get a better newer one for the same price" because then I would never sell the damn thing.