Do we really need a “Digital Humanism”? A critique based on post-human philosophy of technology and socio-legal techniques

Federica Buongiorno , Xenia Chiaramonte
{"title":"Do we really need a “Digital Humanism”? A critique based on post-human philosophy of technology and socio-legal techniques","authors":"Federica Buongiorno ,&nbsp;Xenia Chiaramonte","doi":"10.1016/j.jrt.2024.100080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Few concepts have been subjected to as intense scrutiny in contemporary discourse as that of “humanism.” While these critiques have acknowledged the importance of retaining certain key aspects of humanism, such as rights, freedom, and human dignity, the term has assumed ambivalence, especially in light of post-colonial and gender studies, that cannot be ignored. The “Vienna Manifesto on Digital Humanism,” as well as the recent volume (2022) titled <em>Perspectives on Digital Humanism</em>, bear a complex imprint of this ambivalence. In this contribution, we aim to bring to the forefront and decipher this underlying trace, by considering alternative (non-humanistic) ways to understand human-technologies relations, beyond the dominant neoliberal paradigm (paragraphs 1 and 2); we then analyse those relations within the specific context of legal studies (paragraphs 3 and 4), one in which the interdependency of humans and non-humans shows a specific and complex form of “fundamental ambivalence.”</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73937,"journal":{"name":"Journal of responsible technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666659624000064/pdfft?md5=a83279cb48841b221775aa3aa2b0256f&pid=1-s2.0-S2666659624000064-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of responsible technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666659624000064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Few concepts have been subjected to as intense scrutiny in contemporary discourse as that of “humanism.” While these critiques have acknowledged the importance of retaining certain key aspects of humanism, such as rights, freedom, and human dignity, the term has assumed ambivalence, especially in light of post-colonial and gender studies, that cannot be ignored. The “Vienna Manifesto on Digital Humanism,” as well as the recent volume (2022) titled Perspectives on Digital Humanism, bear a complex imprint of this ambivalence. In this contribution, we aim to bring to the forefront and decipher this underlying trace, by considering alternative (non-humanistic) ways to understand human-technologies relations, beyond the dominant neoliberal paradigm (paragraphs 1 and 2); we then analyse those relations within the specific context of legal studies (paragraphs 3 and 4), one in which the interdependency of humans and non-humans shows a specific and complex form of “fundamental ambivalence.”

我们真的需要 "数字人文主义 "吗?基于后人类技术哲学和社会法律技术的批判
在当代的讨论中,很少有概念像 "人文主义 "这样受到如此严格的审查。虽然这些批判承认保留人文主义某些关键方面的重要性,如权利、自由和人的尊严,但该术语也具有不容忽视的矛盾性,特别是在后殖民和性别研究方面。维也纳数字人文主义宣言 "以及最近出版的《数字人文主义视角》(2022 年)都带有这种矛盾的复杂烙印。在这篇论文中,我们的目标是通过考虑在新自由主义主导范式之外理解人类与技术关系的其他(非人道的)方式(第 1 段和第 2 段),将这一潜在的痕迹置于前沿并加以解读;然后,我们在法律研究的特定背景下分析这些关系(第 3 段和第 4 段),在这一背景下,人类与非人类的相互依存关系呈现出一种特定而复杂的 "基本矛盾 "形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of responsible technology
Journal of responsible technology Information Systems, Artificial Intelligence, Human-Computer Interaction
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
168 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信