1: Introduction

Author:

van de Poel Ibo1ORCID,Hopster Jeroen2ORCID,Löhr Guido3ORCID,Ziliotti Elena1ORCID,Buijsman Stefan1ORCID,Brey Philip4ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Technische Universiteit Delft

2. Utrecht University

3. Vrije University Amsterdam

4. University of Twente

Abstract

Technologies have all kinds of impacts, on the environment, on human behavior, on our society and on what we believe and value. But some technologies are not just impactful, they are also socially disruptive: they challenge existing institutions, social practices, beliefs and conceptual categories. Here we are particularly interested in technologies that disrupt existing concepts, for example because they lead to profound uncertainty about how to classify matters. Is a humanoid robot - which looks and even acts like a human - to be classified as a person, or is it just an inert machine? Conceptual disruption occurs when the meaning of concepts is challenged, and it may potentially lead to a revision of concepts. We illustrate how technologies can be conceptually disruptive through a range of examples, and we argue for an intercultural outlook in studying socially disruptive technologies and conceptual disruption. Such an outlook is needed to avoid a Western bias in calling technologies socially or conceptually disruptive, and it takes inspiration from a broad range of philosophical traditions.

Funder

Dutch Research Council

Publisher

Open Book Publishers

Reference51 articles.

1. Baker, Robert. 2013. Before Bioethics: A History of American Medical Ethics from the Colonial Period to the Bioethics Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press)

2. Moral obligations towards future generations in African thought;Behrens, Kevin Gary;Journal of Global Ethics,2012

3. Brain Death and the Historical Understanding of Bioethics;Belkin, G. S.;Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences,2003

4. Bernstein, Anna, and Kelly Jones. 2019. ‘The economic effects of contraceptive access: A review of the evidence’, Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) Report #B381, https://iwpr.org/iwpr-issues/reproductive-health/the-economic-effects-of-contraceptive-access-a-review-of-the-evidence/

5. Bijker, Wiebe, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch (eds). 1987. The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology (Cambridge: MIT Press)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3