Cargando…
Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives
In the last decades increasing attention is paid to the topic of responsibility in technology development and engineering. The discussion of this topic is often guided by questions related to liability and blameworthiness. Recent discussions in engineering ethics call for a reconsideration of the tr...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Netherlands
2009
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3275746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19949999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-009-9189-3 |
_version_ | 1782223266199371776 |
---|---|
author | Doorn, Neelke |
author_facet | Doorn, Neelke |
author_sort | Doorn, Neelke |
collection | PubMed |
description | In the last decades increasing attention is paid to the topic of responsibility in technology development and engineering. The discussion of this topic is often guided by questions related to liability and blameworthiness. Recent discussions in engineering ethics call for a reconsideration of the traditional quest for responsibility. Rather than on alleged wrongdoing and blaming, the focus should shift to more socially responsible engineering, some authors argue. The present paper aims at exploring the different approaches to responsibility in order to see which one is most appropriate to apply to engineering and technology development. Using the example of the development of a new sewage water treatment technology, the paper shows how different approaches for ascribing responsibilities have different implications for engineering practice in general, and R&D or technological design in particular. It was found that there was a tension between the demands that follow from these different approaches, most notably between efficacy and fairness. Although the consequentialist approach with its efficacy criterion turned out to be most powerful, it was also shown that the fairness of responsibility ascriptions should somehow be taken into account. It is proposed to look for alternative, more procedural ways to approach the fairness of responsibility ascriptions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3275746 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | Springer Netherlands |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-32757462012-02-21 Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives Doorn, Neelke Sci Eng Ethics Original Paper In the last decades increasing attention is paid to the topic of responsibility in technology development and engineering. The discussion of this topic is often guided by questions related to liability and blameworthiness. Recent discussions in engineering ethics call for a reconsideration of the traditional quest for responsibility. Rather than on alleged wrongdoing and blaming, the focus should shift to more socially responsible engineering, some authors argue. The present paper aims at exploring the different approaches to responsibility in order to see which one is most appropriate to apply to engineering and technology development. Using the example of the development of a new sewage water treatment technology, the paper shows how different approaches for ascribing responsibilities have different implications for engineering practice in general, and R&D or technological design in particular. It was found that there was a tension between the demands that follow from these different approaches, most notably between efficacy and fairness. Although the consequentialist approach with its efficacy criterion turned out to be most powerful, it was also shown that the fairness of responsibility ascriptions should somehow be taken into account. It is proposed to look for alternative, more procedural ways to approach the fairness of responsibility ascriptions. Springer Netherlands 2009-12-01 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3275746/ /pubmed/19949999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-009-9189-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2009 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Doorn, Neelke Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives |
title | Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives |
title_full | Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives |
title_fullStr | Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives |
title_full_unstemmed | Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives |
title_short | Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives |
title_sort | responsibility ascriptions in technology development and engineering: three perspectives |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3275746/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19949999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-009-9189-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT doornneelke responsibilityascriptionsintechnologydevelopmentandengineeringthreeperspectives |