Snowden's actions encompass levels two and four of Kohlberg's moral development. In the second stage, one “acts” on the basis of one's self-interest and supports individualism (“Kohlberg's Moral Stages.” xx). However, for the NSA, Snowden should have acted in a manner closer to Step Four, which focuses on social systems and consciousness in his allegiance to the organization. The fourth step supports Snowden's desired actions by "fulfilling his accepted duties and upholding the law" ("Kohlberg's Moral Steps." xx). The above supports the argument that Snowden is a thief and a traitor when it comes to the NSA, nevertheless, it also fails to support the autonomy that is valued within our society and which constitutes a large part of our democratic values ​​of freedom since the creation of the United States. the same ethical theory that would qualify him as a traitor and a thief. The above is indicative of the ethical dilemma surrounding this matter. Snowden's job entailed great responsibility in protecting the information he had access to. Nonetheless, the information Snowden obtained conflicted with the morals, reasoning, and values ​​that Snowden upholds as an individual. The preceding traits are attributed with equal decency by many individuals within our society and this is why many people support Snowden's actions. From an ethical perspective, Snowden did the correct thing by acting in a way that supported the greatest good for the greatest number. people. This is confirmed by statements made by Snowden about his actions. This theory does not take into account the harmful consequences of Snowden's actions middle of paper ........ also allowing him to take into account the duty he had to American citizens who believe that an invasion of privacy is unethical. By disclosing the information and making the parties supporting it aware of their invasion of privacy, Snowden justifies his actions by fulfilling his duty to safeguard the privacy rights of the parties involved. Once again, when Snowden's actions are viewed through the ethical lens of moral relativism, they are justified due to the importance of the privacy of the parties involved who are being monitored by the NSA. The vagueness and simplistic application of moral relativism is precisely why this approach is less often discussed. The opposite continuum of circumstances that would qualify Snowden as a whistleblower with respect to his support group are the same circumstances that his non-supporters use to discredit his actions when applying whistleblower theory.