David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Poiesis and Praxis 4 (1):6-18 (2006)
Ubiquitous computing technologies will have a wide impact on our daily lives in the future. Currently, most debates about social implications of these technologies concentrate on different aspects of privacy and data security. However, the authors of this paper argue that there is more to consider from a social perspective: In particular, the question is raised how people can maintain control in environments that are supposed to be totally automated. Hinting at the possibility that people may be subdued to machinesâ autonomous actions we introduce the term Technology Paternalism . We elaborate a working definition and illustrate the concept by looking at different examples based on current and future technology. We also dwell on the impacts of ubiquity and control of technology and suggest some approaches to assure a reasonable balance of interests such as a general right for the last word
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Katharina E. Kinder, Linden J. Ball & Jerry S. Busby (2007). Ubiquitous Technologies, Cultural Logics and Paternalism in Industrial Workplaces. Poiesis and Praxis 5 (3-4):265-290.
Bjørn Hofmann (2003). Technological Paternalism: On How Medicine has Reformed Ethics and How Technology Can Refine Moral Theory. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (3):343-352.
R. B. Patel & B. P. Singh (eds.) (2011). 2nd International Conference on Methods and Models in Science and Technology (Icm2st-11), Jaipur, India, 19-20 November 2011. [REVIEW] American Institute of Physics.
Jeroen van Den Hoven (2006). Nanotechnology and Privacy. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 20 (2):215-228.
Mary J. Granger & Joyce Currie Little (2001). Creating an Organizational Awareness of Ethical Responsibility About Information Technology. Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (2):239-246.
Soraj Hongladarom (2013). Ubiquitous Computing, Empathy and the Self. AI and Society 28 (2):227-236.
Pak-Hang Wong (2013). Technology, Recommendation and Design: On Being a 'Paternalistic' Philosopher. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):27-42.
Graeme Kirkpatrick (2008). Technology and Social Power. Palgrave Macmillan.
Daniel Memmi (2013). Cultural Consequences of Computing Technology. AI and Society 28 (1):77-85.
Shinichi Doi & Keiji Yamada (2011). Symbiotic Technology for Creating Social Innovation 30 Years in the Future. AI and Society 26 (3):197-204.
Philip Brey (2005). Freedom and Privacy in Ambient Intelligence. Ethics and Information Technology 7 (3):157-166.
Whachul Son (2008). What Are We Experiencing? Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 48:65-73.
Gerhard Chroust (2003). E-Teaching-Panacea or Crisis? World Futures 59 (1):51 – 62.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads4 ( #198,718 of 1,089,104 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,982 of 1,089,104 )
How can I increase my downloads?