技术时代责任主体的确立:汉斯-约纳斯与布鲁诺-拉图尔

Danutė Bacevičiūtė
{"title":"技术时代责任主体的确立:汉斯-约纳斯与布鲁诺-拉图尔","authors":"Danutė Bacevičiūtė","doi":"10.53631/athena.2021.16.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article opposes the attempts to marginalize ethical issues and defend the thesis of technosphere as an autonomous phenomenon in the Anthropocene. The author points out that by evading the question of ethical perspective and responsibility, the technological activity and its trace are naturalised, and any ethical decision is therefore turned into a technical decision. The comparison of the positions of two philosophers of technology (Hans Jonas and Bruno Latour) enables us to reflect on how technology mediates the constitution of the subject of responsibility in the tension of global and local perspectives. The article shows that Jonas’ “heuristics of fear” leads to the conscious practice of asceticism and the collective control of technical power, while Latour leaves open a possibility of talking about the shared action of a multitude of hybrid actors, in which both the ethical solution is already “contaminated” with the technical and the technical solution retains the trace of the ethical. By using the example of the reverse vending machine, it is shown how ethical motivation is inscribed into technical media, which uses the technological accumulation to link global and local perspectives for environmental purposes.","PeriodicalId":241380,"journal":{"name":"Athena: filosofijos studijos","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Atsakomybės subjekto steigtis technikos amžiuje: Hansas Jonas ir Bruno Latouras\",\"authors\":\"Danutė Bacevičiūtė\",\"doi\":\"10.53631/athena.2021.16.6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article opposes the attempts to marginalize ethical issues and defend the thesis of technosphere as an autonomous phenomenon in the Anthropocene. The author points out that by evading the question of ethical perspective and responsibility, the technological activity and its trace are naturalised, and any ethical decision is therefore turned into a technical decision. The comparison of the positions of two philosophers of technology (Hans Jonas and Bruno Latour) enables us to reflect on how technology mediates the constitution of the subject of responsibility in the tension of global and local perspectives. The article shows that Jonas’ “heuristics of fear” leads to the conscious practice of asceticism and the collective control of technical power, while Latour leaves open a possibility of talking about the shared action of a multitude of hybrid actors, in which both the ethical solution is already “contaminated” with the technical and the technical solution retains the trace of the ethical. By using the example of the reverse vending machine, it is shown how ethical motivation is inscribed into technical media, which uses the technological accumulation to link global and local perspectives for environmental purposes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":241380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Athena: filosofijos studijos\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Athena: filosofijos studijos\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53631/athena.2021.16.6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Athena: filosofijos studijos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53631/athena.2021.16.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文反对将伦理问题边缘化的企图,并捍卫技术圈作为人类世一种自主现象的论点。作者指出,通过回避伦理视角和责任问题,技术活动及其痕迹被自然化,任何伦理决策都因此变成了技术决策。两位技术哲学家(汉斯·乔纳斯和布鲁诺·拉图尔)立场的比较使我们能够反思技术如何在全球和地方视角的紧张中调解责任主体的构成。文章表明,乔纳斯的“恐惧启智”导致了禁欲主义的自觉实践和对技术权力的集体控制,而拉图尔则开启了一种讨论众多混合行动者的共同行动的可能性,在这种行动中,伦理解决方案已经被技术“污染”了,而技术解决方案又保留了伦理的痕迹。通过使用反向自动售货机的例子,它显示了道德动机是如何嵌入技术媒体的,它利用技术积累将全球和地方的观点与环境目的联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Atsakomybės subjekto steigtis technikos amžiuje: Hansas Jonas ir Bruno Latouras
This article opposes the attempts to marginalize ethical issues and defend the thesis of technosphere as an autonomous phenomenon in the Anthropocene. The author points out that by evading the question of ethical perspective and responsibility, the technological activity and its trace are naturalised, and any ethical decision is therefore turned into a technical decision. The comparison of the positions of two philosophers of technology (Hans Jonas and Bruno Latour) enables us to reflect on how technology mediates the constitution of the subject of responsibility in the tension of global and local perspectives. The article shows that Jonas’ “heuristics of fear” leads to the conscious practice of asceticism and the collective control of technical power, while Latour leaves open a possibility of talking about the shared action of a multitude of hybrid actors, in which both the ethical solution is already “contaminated” with the technical and the technical solution retains the trace of the ethical. By using the example of the reverse vending machine, it is shown how ethical motivation is inscribed into technical media, which uses the technological accumulation to link global and local perspectives for environmental purposes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信