David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (4):663-684 (2006)
In this paper we report on our experiences with using network analysis to discern and analyse ethical issues in research into, and the development of, a new wastewater treatment technology. Using network analysis, we preliminarily interpreted some of our observations in a Group Decision Room (GDR) session where we invited important stakeholders to think about the risks of this new technology. We show how a network approach is useful for understanding the observations, and suggests some relevant ethical issues. We argue that a network approach is also useful for ethical analysis of issues in other fields of research and development. The abandoning of the overarching rationality assumption, which is central to network approaches, does not have to lead to ethical relativism.
|Keywords||research and development ethical parallel research network approach group decision room responsibility risks sewage treatment|
|Categories||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
Bruno Latour (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1991). Risk and Rationality. University of California Press.
Sven Ove Hansson (2004). Philosophical Perspectives on Risk. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 8 (1):10-35.
Paul C. Stern & Harvey V. Fineberg (eds.) (1996). Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. National Academies Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Neelke Doorn (2012). Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (1):69-90.
Sabine Roeser (2012). Emotional Engineers: Toward Morally Responsible Design. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (1):103-115.
Ibo van de Poel (2008). How Should We Do Nanoethics? A Network Approach for Discerning Ethical Issues in Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 2 (1):25-38.
Daan Schuurbiers (2011). What Happens in the Lab: Applying Midstream Modulation to Enhance Critical Reflection in the Laboratory. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):769-788.
Simone van der Burg (2011). Taking the “Soft Impacts” of Technology Into Account: Broadening the Discourse in Research Practice. Social Epistemology 23 (3):301-316.
Similar books and articles
Ruth McNally, Sociomics! Using the “IssueCrawler” to Map, Monitor and Engage with the Global Proteomics Research Network.
A. van Gorp & S. van der Molen (2011). Parallel, Embedded or Just Part of the Team: Ethicists Cooperating Within a European Security Research Project. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (1):31-43.
David Hunter, Tis but a Scratch: The Human Tissue Act and the Use of Tissue for Research, Issues for Research Ethics Committees.
Gaston Heimeriks, Marianne Hörlesberger & Peter Van den Besselaar, Mapping Communication and Collaboration in Heterogeneous Research Networks.
William P. Cordeiro (1997). Suggested Management Responses to Ethical Issues Raised by Technological Change. Journal of Business Ethics 16 (12-13):1393-1400.
Angelo Carrascoso (2011). The Ethical Issues Surrounding Network-Expansion Strategies in SME Internationalization. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 30 (1-2):71-112.
Barry Wellman (1983). Network Analysis: Some Basic Principles. Sociological Theory 1:155-200.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #150,455 of 1,724,741 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #81,198 of 1,724,741 )
How can I increase my downloads?