One of the most striking phenomena of our time is the climate of uncertainty and confusion about fundamental norms and values. It has even been observed that the movement of modern science and technology has eroded the foundations from which norms could be derived. Meanwhile, in this time of confusion ethics is observed to be blossoming as never before in our universities. This paper addresses the question how assured we can be that a hefty dose of ethics in science and (...) the university is an appropriate medicine for the problems of the modern age. A roundabout route is taken. Our analysis begins not with the current problem of norms and values but with another characteristic feature of our century, namely the spiraling course of science and technology. Some initial critical reflections on the widespread view of the autonomy of science and technology suggest that in the technological society we face problems our theoretical toolkit is not outfitted to deal with. Traditionally, ethics has been concerned with the regulation of human action between individual human subjects. The need and possibilities for an ethics for collective human action or for an ethics on a systems level is indicated. It is concluded that today perhaps more than ever, science and the university have an important task to fulfill. (shrink)

The Bremen research group (the psychologists Birgit Volmerg and Thomas Leithäuser and the social scientist Eva Senghaas-Knobloch) was concerned with investigation into criteria for social compatibility in the area of information and communication technology, as well as with the perspectives for action in different occupational situations experienced by engineers. One central problem that remained unresolved during discussions with nine groups of engineers was the relationship between economy and culture. Only within the context of a cooperative cost-benefit or means-and-ends discussion (in (...) which all groups in society participate) are problem-conscious engineers able to utilise their professional responsibility in the sense of achieving socially responsible technological development. (shrink)

This article concentrates on development of the mutual relations between ethics of technology and so called technology assessment. It shows both identical and different signs of the interactions on examples taken from Germany and from the Czech Republic. Discussion on technology in Germany is noted for its strong moral charge – we can find here both enthusiasm for technology as well as very clean cut anti-technology attitudes. As for the Czech environment, there comes to mutual mixing of various attitudes – (...) we can trace here inspiration taken from other countries – for example from France. The original contribution of the Czech way of thinking in the field of philosophy on technology in relation to ethics represents also so called conception of laboretism. Globally said, it appears that disputes over technology have their cause in various ethical attitudes of interested stakeholders. But different conceptions of what is and/or what is not ethical can be and should be analysed by rational means. Various practical objectives of the social technology assessment should not displace ethics in technology as a methodology of discursive management of technology conflicts. Scientific consultancy has to comprise both its descriptive and prescriptive aspects. It gives a new sense to interdisciplinary co-operation among various scientific disciplines and science and technology ethics. (shrink)

An epistemology mainly oriented at a philosophical discussion of natural sciences and technology is sketched out on the basis of the author’s “methodological scheme-interpretationism” combining a realistic and a perspectival pragmatic approach. - In the main part, 12 characteristic features of the New Technologies are presented and discussed as, e.g., operationalization, computerization, models and modularity, virtuality and artificiality, interdisciplinary interaction, comprehensive and complex systems, telematization and remote control, robotics and AI technology and automatization as well as “socio-eco-techno-systems”, technology-driven globalization and (...) the respective problems of individual and social responsibility. - Also, actual trends are listed and future tasks for the international ecological cooperation of states, UN and UNESCO bodies under urgent guidelines of humanitarian values and “practical/concrete humanity” are recommended. (shrink)

This second companion volume on engineering studies considers engineering practice including contextual analyses of engineering identity, epistemologies and values. Key overlapping questions examine such issues as an engineering identity, engineering self-understandings enacted in the professional world, distinctive characters of engineering knowledge and how engineering science and engineering design interact in practice. -/- Authors bring with them perspectives from their institutional homes in Europe, North America, Australia\ and Asia. The volume includes 24 contributions by more than 30 authors from engineering, the (...) social sciences and the humanities. Additional issues the chapters scrutinize include prominent norms of engineering, how they interact with the values of efficiency or environmental sustainability. A concluding set of articles considers the meaning of context more generally by asking if engineers create their own contexts or are they created by contexts. -/- Taken as a whole, this collection of original scholarly work is unique in its broad, multidisciplinary consideration of the changing character of engineering practice. (shrink)

A prima facie analysis suggests that there are essentially two, mutually exclusive, ways in which risk arising from engineering design can be managed: by imposing external constraints on engineers or by engendering their feelings of responsibility and respect their autonomy. The author discusses the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches. However, he then shows that this opposition is a false one and that there is no simple relation between regulation and autonomy. Furthermore, the author argues that the most pressing need (...) is not more or less regulation but the further development of moral imagination. The enhancement of moral imagination can help engineers to discern the moral relevance of design problems, to create new design options, and to envisage the possible outcomes of their designs. The author suggests a dual program of developing regulatory frameworks that support engineers’ autonomy and responsibility simultaneously with efforts to promote their moral imagination. He describes how some existing institutional changes have started off in this direction and proposes empirical research to take this further. (shrink)