共查询到19条相似文献，搜索用时 203 毫秒
1.
女性主义伦理学是妇女解放运动的产物,是在对传统伦理学的批判中发展起来的,其目的是批评贬低和歧视女性的伦理理论,建立男女平等的伦理学说。关怀伦理学是当代女性主义伦理学中的重要理论,它从女性的视角,强调人与人之间的责任、情感、关系以及相互关怀,这对于我们主张从意识形态和社会生活实践中实现两性和谐有着非常重要的指导意义。 相似文献
2.
传统伦理学中的理性主义在面临冲突的道德判断时往往束手无策,而情感主义提供的解决方案又面临相对主义的危险,近年来,随着自然主义向伦理学领域的延伸,人们注意到也许基于认知神经科学的神经伦理学能为我们提供一条新的解决问题的进路,从而使科学地研究道德判断成为可能。本文着重评价Joshua D. Greene及其同事们在实验基础上提出的道德判断冲突处理理论,并认为,道德判断有其神经生物学基础,情感和认知在道德判断中的作用是竞争性的,而其原因来自于人类的演化。 相似文献
3.
刘永谋 《科学技术与辩证法》2013,(6):52-56
波兹曼对技治主义的评论非常具有典型性。他分析技治主义在当代社会的危害,指出当代技术与官僚主义紧密结合在一起,批评社会科学是技术统治工具和伪科学,提出以技术无神论应对技治主义的问题。波兹曼的分析是基于人文主义立场的,对于技治主义者和当代社会是必要的警醒,但用人文知识分子的精英主义反对科学技术专家的精英主义,忽视了技治主义进步的一面。 相似文献
4.
罗尔斯顿自然价值论伦理学作为环境伦理学的主要流派,就其理论特点而言是环境伦理学理论的整体主义发展趋向的重要代表。作为自然价值论伦理学建构原则的生态-整体论原则,集中体现了理论的整体主义特征。文章通过对罗氏思想的系统梳理,力图揭示罗氏如何借助生态-整体论原则对内在价值进行生态界定,并在此基础上提出了自然价值的等级结构。这在本质上,就使自然价值成为自然价值论伦理学的逻辑基点,由此推导出人类应对自然承担的道德义务。 相似文献
5.
传统的超越主义伦理学进路存在着不少无法解决的问题,而近年来产生的神经伦理学为解决这些问题提供了一个新的视角。神经伦理学因立足于认知神经科学对道德判断、自由意志和元伦理学等问题的涉及而成为“科学”的伦理学,但也因其还原论倾向而对传统伦理学形成了挑战。 相似文献
6.
生态批评（ecocriticism）肇始于欧美六、七十年代,在短短的几十年时间里迅速发展起来,并逐渐成为很有影响力的文学批评潮流。随着1992年美国文学与环境研究协会（ASLE）的成立,关注生态批评的学者每年成倍增长。在当代西方的人文社会科学领域,以“生态”（ecoecological）冠名的学科、学说或主义数不胜数,如生态哲学（ecophilosophy）、生态神学（eco-theology）、生态政治学（ecologicalpolitics）、生态经济学（ecologicaleconomics）、生态人文主义（ecologicalhumanism）、生态女性主义（ecofeminism）等等。是什么催生了生态批评的产生？生态批评经历了怎样的发展过程？生态批评具有哪些特征？生态批评发展前景如何？本文将带着这些问题对生态批评进行讨论 相似文献
7.
新老卢德运动比较研究 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
文章考察了“卢德意象”从贬损到褒扬的历史嬗变 ,探讨了新老卢德运动在性质、目的、方式和后果等方面的区别 ,通过分析技术、政治经济和社会文化心理特征阐明了新老卢德运动的联系 ,提出老卢德运动为新卢德运动提供灵感、勇气和动力 ,新卢德主义实质是一种技术批评主义 ,是技术批评主义在后工业社会新的存在方式。 相似文献
8.
康德的道德哲学冲击了伊壁鸠鲁学派的享乐主义和斯多亚学派的幸福主义的传统伦理学,建立了完全不同于以往传统伦理学的道德观。本文通过主要说明意志自由这一概念的设定在康德道德形而上学中的核心地位。 相似文献
9.
一种技术时代的责任伦理何以可能——试论汉斯·约纳斯的责任原理及其实践 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
约纳斯认为,传统伦理学在本质上是人类中心论的,这种伦理学对技术时代的文明产生了负面影响.他基于对科学技术的哲学批判和伦理评估,尝试建立一种新型的伦理学,即责任伦理.他从责任的起源、实现及其基础等方面对责任伦理进行了理论探讨,不仅试图回答技术时代的责任伦理何以可能的问题,而且力图将责任原理[命令]运用到技术、医学与伦理学领域,表明这种责任伦理之于技术时代的重要性及其现实效应.约纳斯对责任原理的论证诉诸道德直觉和神学奠基,在责任的实现途径上他既诉诸于集体权力又强调个体责任;而这种不同于以往伦理学的理论尝试根植于他对人类中心论的深刻反思以及对自然和价值别具匠心的理解. 相似文献
10.
11.
面临着科技活动已上升为一种高风险程度时,人们提出了科技伦理化来消解这种"高后果风险"。从理论层面看来,科技伦理化是不是人类良性的认知活动?它能否解决人类现实的生存危机?科技(知识)能否以德性(伦理)为前提?这是当代人类得以解决的棘手的一系列问题。实际上,只有保障伦理在科学正确引导的前提下,科技伦理化才能得以可能;而且,科技与德性处于平衡状态中,人类的生存危机才能得以缓解。 相似文献
12.
Contemporary ICTs such as speaking machines and computer games tend to create illusions. Is this ethically problematic? Is it deception? And what kind of “reality” do we presuppose when we talk about illusion in this context? Inspired by work on similarities between ICT design and the art of magic and illusion, responding to literature on deception in robot ethics and related fields, and briefly considering the issue in the context of the history of machines, this paper discusses these questions through the lens of stage magic and illusionism, with the aim of reframing the very question of deception. It investigates if we can take a more positive or at least morally neutral view of magic, illusion, and performance, while still being able to understand and criticize the relevant phenomena, and if we can describe and evaluate these phenomena without recourse to the term “deception” at all. This leads the paper into a discussion about metaphysics and into taking a relational and narrative turn. Replying to Tognazzini, the paper identifies and analyses two metaphysical positions: a narrative and performative non-dualist position is articulated in response to what is taken to be a dualist, in particular Platonic, approach to “deception” phenomena. The latter is critically discussed and replaced by a performative and relational approach which avoids a distant “view from nowhere” metaphysics and brings us back to the phenomena and experience in the performance relation. The paper also reflects on the ethical and political implications of the two positions: for the responsibility of ICT designers and users, which are seen as co-responsible magicians or co-performers, and for the responsibility of those who influence the social structures that shape who has (more) power to deceive or to let others perform. 相似文献
13.
Antonio Marturano 《Ethics and Information Technology》2002,4(1):71-78
In the following essay, I will discuss D.Johnson's argument in her ETHICOMP99 KeynoteSpeech (Johnson 1999) regarding the possiblefuture disappearance of computer ethics as anautonomous discipline, and I will analyze somelikely objections to Johnson's view.In the future, there are two ways in whichcomputer ethics might disappear: (1) therejection of computer ethics as an aspect ofapplied ethics, or (2) the rejection ofcomputer ethics as an autonomous discipline.The first path, it seems to me, would lead tothe death of the entire field of appliedethics, while the second path would lead onlyto the death of computer ethics as a separatesubject. Computer technology is becoming very pervasive,and each scientific field includes somediscipline-specific computing. For the likelyforeseeable future, disciplines such asbioethics and engineering ethics will have todeal with ethical issues involving the role ofcomputers. I will argue that computer ethics inthis sense is unlikely to disappear, even ifcomputer ethics ceases to be considered as aseparate discipline.In order to understand which path will befollowed by computer ethics, I will compareJohnson's argument with ideas of earlierthinkers like N. Wiener (1950) and B. Russell(1932). Although Russell did not specificallyconsider computer technology, he had somegood intuitions about the development ofsocieties by means of technology.My conclusion will be two-fold: (1) thatapplied ethics will not die, but it may make nosense in the future to talk about computerethics as a separate field; and (2) thatcomputer ethics will not simply become``ordinary ethics', contrary to Johnson's view. 相似文献
14.
吴致远、梁国钊两先生的《诺贝尔奖评委会亏待了吴健雄吗？》这篇文章,对《吴健雄——诺贝尔奖亏待了的华人女性科学家》一文的部分观点提出了批评。本文从七个方面对他们的批评做出回应,并着重就 “提出问题与解决问题”、“脑的发现”与“眼的发现”、如何看待诺贝尔奖、“吴健雄的实验够不够好”、“精确与原创是什么关系”等关键问题,做适当讨论。 相似文献
15.
Invoking politics and ethics in the design of information technology: undesigning the design 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
It is a truism that the design and deployment of information and communication technologies is vital to everyday life, the conduct of work and to social order. But how are individual, organisational and societal choices made? What might it mean to invoke a politics and an ethics of information technology design and use? This editorial paper situates these questions within the trajectory of preoccupations and approaches to the design and deployment of information technology since computerisation began in the 1940s. Focusing upon the dominant concerns over the last three decades, the paper delineates an interest in design and use in relation to socio-technical theories, situated practices and actor-network theory. It is argued that each of these approaches is concerned with a particular form of politics that does not explicitly engage with ethics. In order to introduce ethics into contemporary debates about information technology, and to frame the papers in the special issue, it is argued that Levinas’ ethics is particularly valuable in problematising the relationship between politics and ethics. Levinas provides a critique of modernity’s emphasis on politics and the egocentric self. It is from a Levinasian concern with the Other and the primacy of the ethical that a general rethinking of the relationship between politics, ethics and justice in relation to information and communication technologies can be invoked. 相似文献
16.
Hepeng Jia 《国家科学评论(英文版)》2020,7(11):1787
With the fast development of cutting-edge technologies and their greater integration into human life, more ethical challenges emerge. The problem became more salient when the world''s first genetically edited babies were born in China in violation of existing ethical rules. Although the responsible researcher He Jiankui was sentenced for imprisonment for three years last December, it is still necessary to examine the current status of research ethics and the challenges in China. Has China set up a sophisticated research ethics system? For research ethics and their implementation in China, are there unique national characteristics? Can the dominant ethics principles primarily developed from life science research be equally adopted in the emerging artificial intelligence research and development? At an online forum organized by National Science Review (NSR) and through subsequent correspondences among forum participants, NSR Executive Editor-in-Chief Mu-ming Poo and guest moderator Hepeng Jia asked three scientists and three bioethicists or philosophers of science and technology in the field to examine the dynamic development of research ethics in China. Weiwen DuanPhilosopher of Science and Technology at Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, China Junjiu HuangLife scientist focused on genetics at Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China Renzong QiuBioethicist at Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, China Qiang SunLife scientist and the principal investigator (PI) of clone monkey program at Shanghai Institute of Neuroscience, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China Yi ZengArtificial intelligence scientist at Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China Xiaomei ZhaiBioethicist at Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences/Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China Mu-ming Poo (Chair)Neurobiologist at Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China Hepeng Jia (Co-chair)Professor of Science Communication at Soochow University, Suzhou, China 相似文献
17.
18.
19.
数字时代，不论是高新技术企业，或是传统企业，都更为频繁地接触到信息在生产、储存、交换、传播中所涉及的伦理道德问题。以“公平”和“公正”这些普遍原则去分析问题，坚持合作与互惠的态度以及遵守即成的具体规则都是企业信息技术伦理的重要组成部分。本文以软件反求工程中的行为冲突对此加以说明。 相似文献