The Self and the Ontic Trust: Toward Technologies of Care and Meaning

Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 17 (3) (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Purpose – Contemporary technology has been implicated in the rise of perfectionism, a personality trait that is associated with depression, suicide and other ills. is paper explores how technology can be developed to promote an alternative to perfectionism, which is a self- constructionist ethic. Design/methodology/approach – is paper takes the form of a philosophical discussion. A conceptual framework is developed by connecting the literature on perfectionism and personal meaning with discussions in information ethics on the self, the ontic trust and technologies of the self. To illustrate these themes, the example of selfies and self-portraits is discussed. Findings – e self today must be understood as both individualistic and relational, i.e., hybrid; the trouble is balance. To realize balance, the self should be recognized as part of the ontic trust to which all information organisms and objects belong. us technologically-mediated self-care takes on a deeper urgency. e selfie is one example of a technology for self-care that has gone astray (i.e., lost some of its care-conducive aspects), but this can be remedied if selfie-making technology incorporates relevant aspects of self-portraiture. is example provides a path for developing self- constructionist and meaningful technologies more generally. Practical implications – Technology development should proceed with self-care and meaning in mind. e comparison of selfies and self-portraits, situated historically and theoretically, provides some guidance in this regard. Some specific avenues for development are presented. Originality/value – e question of the self has not been much discussed in information ethics. is paper links the self to the ontic trust: the self can be fruitfully understood as an agent within the ontic trust to which we all belong.

Similar books and articles

Trusting Our Selves to Technology.Asle H. Kiran & Peter-Paul Verbeek - 2010 - Knowledge, Technology & Policy 23 (3):409-427.
Trust as a Public Virtue.Warren Von Eschenbach (ed.) - 2019 - London and New York:
Autonomy, Trust, and Respect.Thomas Nys - 2015 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 41 (1):10-24.
Studying the ethical implications of e-trust in the lab.Cristina Bicchieri & Azi Lev-On - 2011 - Ethics and Information Technology 13 (1):5-15.
The Importance of Trust for Ethics, Law, and Public Policy.Mark A. Hall - 2005 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 14 (2):156-167.
Trust as Robustly Moral.Alisa Carse - 2010 - Philosophic Exchange 40 (1).
Trust in technological systems.Philip J. Nickel - 2013 - In M. J. de Vries, S. O. Hansson & A. W. M. Meijers (eds.), Norms in technology: Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 9. Springer.
Mutual Respect in an Ethic of Care.Derek G. Ross & Marion Parks - 2018 - Teaching Ethics 18 (1):1-15.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-05-23

Downloads
979 (#13,396)

6 months
424 (#3,970)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tim Gorichanaz
Drexel University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The informational nature of personal identity.Luciano Floridi - 2011 - Minds and Machines 21 (4):549-566.
Web 2.0 Technologies of the Self.Maria Bakardjieva & Georgia Gaden - 2012 - Philosophy and Technology 25 (3):399-413.
What Is a Portrait?Hans R. V. Maes - 2015 - British Journal of Aesthetics 55 (3):303-322.

View all 6 references / Add more references