What sort of ethics does technology require?

Journal of Ethics

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 155-175

  Doppelt, Gerald ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternative modernity; Democratization; Ethical argument; Lockean morality; Modernity; Non essentialist; Philosophy of technology; Technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 22044446302     PISSN: 13824554     EISSN: 15728609     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1011956206973     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. In this essay, I will mainly focus upon theoretical formulations in Andrew Feenberg, Questioning Technology (London and New York: Routledge, 1999)
2. which I hereafter abbreviate as "QT," and the historical cases in Andrew Feenberg, Alternative Modernity: The Technical Turn in Philosophy and Social Theory (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1995)
3. which hereafter I abbreviate as "AM." Also see Andrew Feenberg, Critical Theory of Technology (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991). All three works make important contributions to Feenberg's philosophy of technology.
4. Feenberg, QT, pp. vii-xvi.
5. Feenberg, QT, pp. vii-x, 14-17, 201-216.
6. Feenberg, QT, pp. 16-17.
7. Feenberg, QT, pp. 87-89, 142-143.
8. Feenberg, AM, pp. 96-123
9. and Feenberg, QT, pp. 127-128, 141-142.
10. Feenberg, QT, p. 141.
11. Feenberg, AM, pp. 144-169
12. Feenberg, QT, pp. 126-128.
13. Feenberg, QT, pp. vii-xvi, 104-109, 131-147.
14. Feenberg, QT, pp. 222-225.
15. Feenberg, QT, pp. 140-142;
16. Feenberg, AM, pp. 104-109.
17. Feenberg acknowledges such cases and the problems they raise. See Feenberg, QT, pp. 92-94.
18. Feenberg, AM, pp. 144-169;
19. Feenberg, QT, pp. 125-128.
20. Feenberg, QT, pp. 140-142.
21. Feenberg, QT.
22. Feenberg, QT, p. 140.
23. For my own attempts to advance such an argument see G. Doppelt, "Rawls' System of Justice: A Critique from the Left," Nous 15 (1981), pp. 259-307;
24. "Conflicting Paradigms of Human Freedom and the Problem of Justification," Inquiry 27 (1984);
25. "Rawls' Kantian Ideal and the Viability of Modern Liberalism," Inquiry 31 (1988), pp. 413-419;
26. and "Is Rawls' Kantian Liberalism Coherent and Defensible?" Ethics 99 (1989), pp. 815-851.
27. For a recent and engaging contribution to this tradition, see I. Shapiro, Democratic Justice (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999)
28. and my "Does More Democracy Yield Greater Justice," Inquiry 44 (2001), forthcoming.
29. Feenberg, QT, pp. 132-137.
30. Feenberg, QT, pp. 134-147.
31. Feenberg, QT, pp. 134-147.
32. Feenberg, QT, pp. 134-147.
33. Feenberg, QT, p. 146.
34. Feenberg, QT.
35. Feenberg, QT, p. 140.
36. Feenberg, QT, p. 141.
37. Feenberg, QT.
38. Feenberg, AM, pp. 144-169.
39. Feenberg, AM, pp. 96-120.
40. Feenberg, AM, pp. 110-118.
41. Feenberg, AM, p. 108.
42. Feenberg, QT, p. 141;
43. Feenberg, AM, p. 109.