...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Science and engineering ethics >Technology, Recommendation and Design: On Being a 'Paternalistic' Philosopher
【24h】

Technology, Recommendation and Design: On Being a 'Paternalistic' Philosopher

机译：技术，推荐与设计：成为“家长式”哲学家

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Philosophers have talked to each other about moral issues concerning technology, but few of them have talked about issues of technology and the good life, and even fewer have talked about technology and the good life with the public in the form of recommendation. In effect, recommendations for various technologies are often left to technologists and gurus. Given the potential benefits of informing the public on their impacts on the good life, however, this is a curious state of affairs. In the present paper, I will examine why philosophers are seemingly reluctant to offer recommendations to the public. While there are many reasons for philosophers to refrain from offering recommendations, I shall focus on a specific normative reason. More specifically, it appears that, according to a particular definition, offering recommendations can be viewed as paternalistic, and therefore is prima facie wrong to do so. I will provide an argument to show that the worry about paternalism is unfounded, because a form of paternalism engendered by technology is inevitable. Given the inevitability of paternalism, I note that philosophers should accept the duty to offer recommendations to the public. I will then briefly turn to design ethics, which has reconceptualised the role of philosophers and, in my mind, fitted well with the inevitability of paternalism. Finally, I shall argue that design ethics has to be supplemented by the practice of recommendation if it is to sustain its objective.
机译：哲学家互相讨论过关于技术的道德问题，但是很少有人谈论技术和美好生活的问题，很少有人以推荐的形式谈论技术和美好生活。实际上，对于各种技术的建议通常留给技术人员和专家。但是，鉴于告知公众其对美好生活的影响的潜在好处，这是一种奇怪的状况。在本文中，我将研究为什么哲学家似乎不愿向公众提出建议。尽管哲学家有很多理由不提出建议，但我将重点关注一个具体的规范性原因。更具体地，看来，根据特定的定义，提供建议可以被视为家长式的，因此这样做显然是错误的。我将提供一个论证来表明，对家长式生活的担忧是没有根据的，因为技术产生的家长式生活是不可避免的。考虑到家长制的必然性，我注意到哲学家应该承担向公众提出建议的责任。然后，我将简要地谈谈设计伦理学，它重新构想了哲学家的角色，在我看来，很适合家长式教育的必然性。最后，我将争辩说，如果要保持其设计目标，就必须在推荐实践中补充设计伦理。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号