科维德-19 危机期间数字技术的默契社会实验。

Theoretical medicine and bioethics Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-25 DOI:10.1007/s11017-024-09669-z
Alain Loute
{"title":"科维德-19 危机期间数字技术的默契社会实验。","authors":"Alain Loute","doi":"10.1007/s11017-024-09669-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the management of the Covid 19 crisis, digital technologies were used in a major way. This article defends the hypothesis that these technologies took the form of a \"tacit social experimentation\". This article justifies this concept in three levels. The first part uses this concept to qualify the form of biopolitics that was implemented to manage the crisis. Digital technologies were used to discipline the population and, literally speaking, as instruments of knowledge of the population. Uncertainty forced experts to make preliminary observations and act to produce knowledge. Second, this article shows that the use of digital technologies during the crisis was experimental in a second sense. By promoting telemedicine within a more flexible legal framework, the authorities authorised an experimental use of telemedicine without knowledge or control of its side effects. Finally, the article defends the use of the concept of \"tacit social experimentation\" for ethical and political purposes. For indeed, understanding the experiments carried out during the crisis begs the question of the involvement of the participants and their democratic steering.</p>","PeriodicalId":94251,"journal":{"name":"Theoretical medicine and bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tacit social experimentation with digital technologies during the Covid-19 crisis.\",\"authors\":\"Alain Loute\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11017-024-09669-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the management of the Covid 19 crisis, digital technologies were used in a major way. This article defends the hypothesis that these technologies took the form of a \\\"tacit social experimentation\\\". This article justifies this concept in three levels. The first part uses this concept to qualify the form of biopolitics that was implemented to manage the crisis. Digital technologies were used to discipline the population and, literally speaking, as instruments of knowledge of the population. Uncertainty forced experts to make preliminary observations and act to produce knowledge. Second, this article shows that the use of digital technologies during the crisis was experimental in a second sense. By promoting telemedicine within a more flexible legal framework, the authorities authorised an experimental use of telemedicine without knowledge or control of its side effects. Finally, the article defends the use of the concept of \\\"tacit social experimentation\\\" for ethical and political purposes. For indeed, understanding the experiments carried out during the crisis begs the question of the involvement of the participants and their democratic steering.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94251,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theoretical medicine and bioethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theoretical medicine and bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-024-09669-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoretical medicine and bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11017-024-09669-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在管理 Covid 19 危机的过程中,数字技术得到了广泛应用。本文为这些技术采取 "隐性社会实验 "形式的假设进行辩护。本文从三个层面论证了这一概念。第一部分利用这一概念对管理危机所采用的生物政治形式进行定性。数字技术被用来约束民众,从字面意义上讲,也被用作了解民众的工具。不确定性迫使专家们进行初步观察,并采取行动生成知识。其次,这篇文章表明,危机期间数字技术的使用在第二种意义上是实验性的。通过在更灵活的法律框架内推广远程医疗,当局授权在不了解或控制其副作用的情况下试验性地使用远程医疗。最后,文章为 "隐性社会实验 "概念在伦理和政治上的应用进行了辩护。事实上,要理解危机期间进行的实验,就必须考虑参与者的参与及其民主指导的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Tacit social experimentation with digital technologies during the Covid-19 crisis.

In the management of the Covid 19 crisis, digital technologies were used in a major way. This article defends the hypothesis that these technologies took the form of a "tacit social experimentation". This article justifies this concept in three levels. The first part uses this concept to qualify the form of biopolitics that was implemented to manage the crisis. Digital technologies were used to discipline the population and, literally speaking, as instruments of knowledge of the population. Uncertainty forced experts to make preliminary observations and act to produce knowledge. Second, this article shows that the use of digital technologies during the crisis was experimental in a second sense. By promoting telemedicine within a more flexible legal framework, the authorities authorised an experimental use of telemedicine without knowledge or control of its side effects. Finally, the article defends the use of the concept of "tacit social experimentation" for ethical and political purposes. For indeed, understanding the experiments carried out during the crisis begs the question of the involvement of the participants and their democratic steering.

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:481959085
Book学术官方微信