Weaponized in support of deregulation and self-regulation,“ethics”is increasingly identified with technology companies’self-regulatory efforts and with shallow appearances of ethical behavior.So-called“ethics wash...Weaponized in support of deregulation and self-regulation,“ethics”is increasingly identified with technology companies’self-regulatory efforts and with shallow appearances of ethical behavior.So-called“ethics washing”by tech companies is on the rise,prompting criticism and scrutiny from scholars and the tech community.The author defines“ethics bashing”as the parallel tendency to trivialize ethics and moral philosophy.Underlying these two attitudes are a few misunderstandings:(1)philosophy is understood in opposition and as alternative to law,political representation,and social organizing;(2)philosophy and“ethics”are perceived as formalistic,vulnerable to instrumentalization,and ontologically flawed;and(3)moral reasoning is portrayed as mere“ivory tower”intellectualization of complex problems that need to be dealt with through other methodologies.This article argues that the rhetoric of ethics and morality should not be reductively instrumentalized,either by the industry in the form of“ethics washing”,or by scholars and policy-makers in the form of“ethics bashing”.Grappling with the role of philosophy and ethics requires moving beyond simplification and seeing ethics as a mode of inquiry that facilitates the evaluation of competing tech policy strategies.We must resist reducing moral philosophy’s role and instead must celebrate its special worth as a mode of knowledge-seeking and inquiry.Far from mandating self-regulation,moral philosophy facilitates the scrutiny of various modes of regulation,situating them in legal,political,and economic contexts.Moral philosophy indeed can explainin the relationship between technology and other worthy goals and can situate technology within the human,the social,and the political.展开更多
In the present article we analyze the ethical dimensions of the issue of human nutrition.Three axes which relate our human diet and food to the moral philosophy,namely the killing of living organisms,overpopulation,an...In the present article we analyze the ethical dimensions of the issue of human nutrition.Three axes which relate our human diet and food to the moral philosophy,namely the killing of living organisms,overpopulation,and genetically modified products respectively,will be analyzed.Finally,we will refer to the philosophy of Deep Ecology and the possible answers it gives to the moral dilemmas we face.展开更多
This paper makes a comparative study of the theory of heavenly principles and human desires in the Neo-Confucianism of the Song and Ming Dynasties and the theory of personality structure in psychoanalytic theory.From ...This paper makes a comparative study of the theory of heavenly principles and human desires in the Neo-Confucianism of the Song and Ming Dynasties and the theory of personality structure in psychoanalytic theory.From the perspective of the construction of the subject,in the debate between the heavenly principle and the human desire,the person is built into the moral subject.The id,ego,and super-ego in the psychoanalytic theory constitute the unconscious structural subject.In the framework of these two theories,the“maintain the heavenly principles and eradicate human desires”and“the heavenly principles exist in desire”in the theory of heavenly principles and human desires express the unity of opposites between heavenly principles and human desire.The core of personality structure theory is the relationship of obedience and control among the id,ego,and super-ego.As far as the value orientation is concerned,the debate between the heavenly principle and the human desire provides a theoretical basis for the moral practice of Confucianism of“aim at absolute perfection”,while the free will of the id in the unconscious subject is the most essential ethical aspect of psychoanalysis.展开更多
文摘Weaponized in support of deregulation and self-regulation,“ethics”is increasingly identified with technology companies’self-regulatory efforts and with shallow appearances of ethical behavior.So-called“ethics washing”by tech companies is on the rise,prompting criticism and scrutiny from scholars and the tech community.The author defines“ethics bashing”as the parallel tendency to trivialize ethics and moral philosophy.Underlying these two attitudes are a few misunderstandings:(1)philosophy is understood in opposition and as alternative to law,political representation,and social organizing;(2)philosophy and“ethics”are perceived as formalistic,vulnerable to instrumentalization,and ontologically flawed;and(3)moral reasoning is portrayed as mere“ivory tower”intellectualization of complex problems that need to be dealt with through other methodologies.This article argues that the rhetoric of ethics and morality should not be reductively instrumentalized,either by the industry in the form of“ethics washing”,or by scholars and policy-makers in the form of“ethics bashing”.Grappling with the role of philosophy and ethics requires moving beyond simplification and seeing ethics as a mode of inquiry that facilitates the evaluation of competing tech policy strategies.We must resist reducing moral philosophy’s role and instead must celebrate its special worth as a mode of knowledge-seeking and inquiry.Far from mandating self-regulation,moral philosophy facilitates the scrutiny of various modes of regulation,situating them in legal,political,and economic contexts.Moral philosophy indeed can explainin the relationship between technology and other worthy goals and can situate technology within the human,the social,and the political.
文摘In the present article we analyze the ethical dimensions of the issue of human nutrition.Three axes which relate our human diet and food to the moral philosophy,namely the killing of living organisms,overpopulation,and genetically modified products respectively,will be analyzed.Finally,we will refer to the philosophy of Deep Ecology and the possible answers it gives to the moral dilemmas we face.
文摘This paper makes a comparative study of the theory of heavenly principles and human desires in the Neo-Confucianism of the Song and Ming Dynasties and the theory of personality structure in psychoanalytic theory.From the perspective of the construction of the subject,in the debate between the heavenly principle and the human desire,the person is built into the moral subject.The id,ego,and super-ego in the psychoanalytic theory constitute the unconscious structural subject.In the framework of these two theories,the“maintain the heavenly principles and eradicate human desires”and“the heavenly principles exist in desire”in the theory of heavenly principles and human desires express the unity of opposites between heavenly principles and human desire.The core of personality structure theory is the relationship of obedience and control among the id,ego,and super-ego.As far as the value orientation is concerned,the debate between the heavenly principle and the human desire provides a theoretical basis for the moral practice of Confucianism of“aim at absolute perfection”,while the free will of the id in the unconscious subject is the most essential ethical aspect of psychoanalysis.
