Moralizing Technology and the ethics of things | Peter-Paul Verbeek | TEDxTwenteU

Summary

The speaker explores the concept of 'ethics of things,' challenging the notion that ethics are solely human. Drawing on Hans Jonas's work, they argue for embedding ethical considerations in technology to alleviate human moral burdens. Critiquing the overemphasis on autonomy, they suggest a more humble view of humanity, influenced by Freudian thought, to better integrate technology into our ethical frameworks. The talk advocates for a design approach that acknowledges technology's role in shaping behavior and ethics, encouraging the 'moralization of technology' for a more nuanced understanding of human-technology interaction.

Takeaways

• 🤔 The concept of ethics in things challenges the traditional view that ethics is a human domain because things, unlike humans, lack freedom and intentions.
• 🚀 Hans Arens proposed 'moralization of devices', suggesting that technology could take on some ethical responsibilities, like slowing cars in foggy conditions, to reduce the burden on humans.
• 🛠️ There's resistance to the idea of embedding ethics in technology, with critics fearing a loss of human autonomy and an increase in technocracy.
• 🌐 The speaker argues that the focus on autonomy as the central ethical concern is limiting and that we should consider a broader view of ethics in technology.
• 📈 Persuasive technology and nudging are current approaches to ethical design, aiming to influence behavior while maintaining transparency and freedom of choice.
• 🔄 Freud's ideas on narcissism are used to suggest that technology could be the 'fourth blow' to human self-importance, prompting a more humble view of our autonomy.
• 🔑 The 'morality of things' is evident in everyday technologies like coin locks on shopping carts, which embody norms and values.
• 💊 The contraceptive pill is highlighted as a technology that has profoundly influenced moral decisions and societal views on sexuality and reproduction.
• 🧠 Don Ihde's postphenomenological approach views technology not as separate from humans but as a medium that shapes our experiences and actions.
• 🛠️ Designing technology with ethics in mind is not just about permission but about how to positively shape the influence technology has on human behavior.
• 🌟 Michel Foucault's concept of 'Technologies of the Self' is introduced as a way to think about ethics as an internal practice of shaping oneself through interaction with technology.

Q & A

What is the central idea of the script?

The central idea of the script is the 'ethics of things,' which explores the possibility that objects and technologies can embody ethical values, influencing human behavior and decisions.

Why does the speaker argue that ethics can be embedded in things?

The speaker argues that ethics can be embedded in things because technologies shape human actions and decisions, often guiding behavior in ways that align with ethical principles, such as slowing down cars in fog or encouraging responsible use of water.

Who is Hans Arous, and what is his contribution to the discussion?

Hans Arous is the speaker's mentor who, in 1992, proposed the idea of 'moralization of devices,' advocating that some ethical responsibilities could be delegated to technologies, thus easing the constant pressure on humans to make moral choices.

What resistance did Hans Arous' ideas face, according to the speaker?

Hans Arous’ ideas faced resistance as people feared that embedding ethics in technology would lead to a technocracy where machines control human freedom, making humans subordinate to technology.

How does the concept of autonomy relate to the ethics of things?

Autonomy is traditionally seen as central to ethics, with the idea that humans should have freedom in making ethical decisions. However, the speaker suggests moving beyond autonomy, arguing that technology inevitably influences behavior and that ethics should focus on managing this influence productively.

What is nudging, and how is it related to the ethics of things?

Nudging is a concept where design choices subtly guide people's behavior, such as setting default options in devices. It relates to the ethics of things by demonstrating how small design decisions can influence ethical behavior without coercing individuals.

What are some examples of technologies influencing behavior provided in the script?

Examples include intelligent speed adaptation systems in cars, water-saving showerheads, speed bumps near schools, and the design of shaving devices for men and women, which reflect societal norms and influence user behavior.

How does the speaker suggest we approach the fear of losing autonomy to technology?

The speaker suggests that instead of fearing the loss of autonomy, we should embrace the idea that technology mediates our actions and behaviors. A more productive interaction with technology can help us shape ethical outcomes without feeling that technology overpowers human freedom.

What role does Michel Foucault's concept of power play in the ethics of things?

Michel Foucault’s concept of power is used to illustrate that ethics is not about rejecting power (or technological influence), but about interacting with it productively. Foucault's idea of 'Technologies of the Self' shows how people can shape their ethical behavior by engaging with the influences around them, including technologies.

What is the speaker's overall conclusion about the role of design in ethics?

The speaker concludes that designing technologies is inherently an ethical activity, as all designs influence human behavior. Rather than resisting this influence, designers should focus on fostering positive, ethical interactions between humans and technology, allowing people to shape their existence in relation to these mediations.

Outlines

00:00

💡 Ethics of Things: Embedding Morality in Technology

The speaker introduces the concept of the 'ethics of things,' a counterintuitive idea suggesting that objects and technologies can have ethical implications. Drawing on the work of Hans Arous, the speaker discusses how delegating ethical responsibilities to things—like speed adaptation systems in cars or water-saving showerheads—can alleviate the moral pressures on humans. The speaker challenges the resistance to this concept, arguing that autonomy should not be the sole focus in ethics and design. They critique approaches like persuasive technology and nudging, which focus on maintaining human autonomy while subtly influencing behavior.

05:01

🧠 Humbling Humanity: Technology as the Fourth Blow to Human Ego

The speaker parallels technology to three significant blows to human narcissism identified by Freud: Copernicus (Earth’s place in the cosmos), Darwin (humans' biological similarity to animals), and Freud himself (the unconscious mind). The speaker suggests technology could be considered the fourth blow, challenging our perception of autonomy. By showing how certain technologies like coin locks and shaving devices carry embedded norms and values, they illustrate how technology mediates moral decisions, pushing society to rethink its ethical frameworks and human dignity in light of technological influences.

10:03

🔄 Technological Mediation: Blurring the Line Between Humans and Objects

The speaker delves into the philosophical idea of technological mediation, suggesting that human actions and perceptions are always shaped by technology. Citing philosopher Don Ihde, they explain how humans are technologically mediated beings, and thus, autonomy is a fiction. The speaker stresses that designers should focus less on preserving autonomy and more on how to shape the impact of technologies on human life, noting that even the frameworks we use to judge technologies are themselves influenced by technology.

15:03

⚖️ Designing Ethics: Moving Beyond Autonomy in Technology Design

The speaker discusses Foucault's concept of power and its application to technology, arguing that ethics is not about opposing technology’s influence, but rather about engaging productively with it. They emphasize that designers should not seek to preserve human autonomy at all costs but instead focus on how people interact with and shape technology. Drawing from Foucault’s 'technologies of the self,' the speaker advocates for a design philosophy that helps people navigate and shape their existence through technology, moving away from autonomy to the concept of mediation.

📐 The Moralization of Technology: Four Types of Influence

Here, the speaker categorizes how technology influences human behavior into four types: coercion (visible, strong impact), persuasion (visible, weak impact), hidden influence with strong impact, and hidden influence with weak impact (seduction). They give examples like speed limiters, buildings without elevators, and couches designed to foster attachment. The speaker argues that if designers shift focus from protecting autonomy to embracing mediation, they can create technologies that subtly guide behavior while allowing individuals to engage with these influences meaningfully.

🔧 Mediation Over Autonomy: The Future of Ethical Design

The speaker concludes by emphasizing the need for designers to embrace the concept of mediation rather than autonomy. They advocate for the integration of ethics directly into the design process, highlighting the importance of shaping human-technology interactions in a way that fosters self-reflection and ethical behavior. Ultimately, they call on designers to engage in the 'moralization of technologies,' arguing that design is a form of ethics by other means.

Keywords

💡Ethics of Things

The 'Ethics of Things' refers to the concept that non-human entities, such as objects or technologies, can embody ethical considerations. In the video, this idea is explored as a way to delegate ethical decisions to technology, reducing the burden on individuals to make constant ethical choices. For instance, the speaker mentions intelligent speed adaptation systems in cars that slow down in foggy conditions, embodying the ethical principle of safety.

💡Moralization of Devices

This term, coined by Hans Arens, suggests that devices or objects can be designed to encourage moral behavior. The video discusses how this concept can be controversial, as it may seem to undermine human autonomy. However, it also suggests that moralizing devices can help alleviate the pressure of constant ethical decision-making by outsourcing some of these decisions to technology.

💡Technocracy

Technocracy is the idea that society should be governed by technical experts. In the context of the video, it is used to describe a potential backlash against moralizing devices, where people fear that technology is taking over and ruling society. The speaker argues against this notion, suggesting that technology can be a tool for ethical living rather than a dictatorial force.

💡Persuasive Technology

Persuasive technology is a type of computing system designed to change people's behavior. The video mentions this in relation to BJ Fogg's work, which focuses on designing technologies that transparently persuade users to act in certain ways. This is contrasted with the idea of moralizing devices, which embed ethics directly into the functionality of technology.

💡Nudge Theory

Nudge theory, developed by Thaler and Sunstein, posits that small prompts or 'nudges' can influence behavior without removing choice. The video discusses how this theory is applied to design choices that steer people towards certain behaviors, like default settings on photocopiers, while maintaining the freedom to choose differently.

💡Autonomy

Autonomy is the capacity to make an independent choice. The video discusses how the concept of autonomy is central to ethical discussions about technology. It is presented as both a value to uphold and a concept that may need to be rethought to fully embrace the potential of ethically designed technology.

💡Paternalism

Paternalism is the practice of restricting an individual's freedom for their own good. The video references 'libertarian paternalism', a concept where designers create choices that nudge people towards beneficial outcomes but allow for opting out, thus balancing the desire to guide behavior with respect for individual autonomy.

💡Psychotherapy

Psychotherapy is a method for treating mental health issues. The video uses the idea of 'psychotherapy' metaphorically to suggest that we need to reassess our narcissistic self-image regarding autonomy. It suggests that we should be humbler about our dependence on technology and recognize it as a part of our ethical lives.

💡Narcissistic Self-Image

A narcissistic self-image refers to an inflated view of one's own importance. The video suggests that technological advancements, like those discussed, can humble us by showing that our autonomy is not as independent as we might think, aligning with Freud's ideas about the human psyche.

💡Technological Mediation

Technological mediation is the influence of technology on how we perceive and interact with the world. The video argues that we are fundamentally technologically mediated beings, and this understanding should inform the ethics of technology design, suggesting that technology is not separate from us but a part of our ethical existence.

💡Postphenomenology

Postphenomenology is a philosophical approach to technology that views it as an integral part of human experience rather than an external factor. The video references Don Ihde's postphenomenological approach to argue that technology mediates our actions and perceptions, and thus ethical design should consider how technology shapes our moral frameworks.

💡Technologies of the Self

Technologies of the self is a concept developed by Michel Foucault, referring to the methods people use to understand, shape, and develop their own identity. The video suggests applying this concept to technology design, encouraging designers to create technologies that allow users to shape their ethical existence.

Highlights

The ethics of things: the idea that objects, not just humans, can embody ethical values and influence behavior.

Delegating ethics to technology: Technology can take on ethical responsibilities, such as smart cars that slow down in fog or water-saving showerheads.

The concept of 'moralization of devices': Hans Arous suggested outsourcing ethical decisions to technology to reduce the burden on individuals.

Ethics versus autonomy: There is resistance to the idea that technology can influence human decisions without reducing autonomy.

Persuasive technologies: Systems designed to influence human behavior while preserving autonomy, such as nudges in choice architecture.

The 'blackmail of autonomy': The mistaken belief that questioning autonomy means opposing human freedom.

Technology as a 'fourth blow' to human narcissism: Following Copernicus, Darwin, and Freud, technology challenges human autonomy and self-image.

Technologies embed values: Even mundane objects like supermarket cart locks or gendered design in shaving devices reflect societal norms.

Technological mediation: Technologies shape how we experience and live our lives; they are not mere tools but mediators of human experience.

The influence of design on ethics: Any design impacts human behavior, making it essential to consider the ethical implications during creation.

Michel Foucault's 'technologies of the self': Ethics is about interacting with power productively, not escaping its influence.

Types of technological influence: From highly visible and strong impacts like coercion to hidden, weak influences like seduction in design.

Designing for sustainability: How innovative design, such as couches that reveal a second layer of fabric, encourages attachment and reduces waste.

Replacing autonomy with mediation: The speaker advocates for focusing on how people interact with technology rather than solely preserving human autonomy.

Designing ethics: Designers are encouraged to integrate ethical considerations directly into the technologies they create, recognizing that design is a form of ethical action.

Transcripts

[Music]

the idea that I would like to share with

you today here is the ethics of things

that there can be an Ethics in in things

that's actually a very counterintuitive

ID right I mean ethics is something

humans do you need freedom and

intentions to do ethics things don't

have freedom don't have intentions so

how could you possibly think in ethical

terms about things so I think it's very

important to do that not only because

it's philosophically interesting but

also because it can really Inspire the

design of better things to take some

form of responsibility for the influence

of technology and Society to make the

point I think it's good to start with

the work of Hans arous my mentor and

teacher who already in 1992 wrote an

article called the moralization of

devices in the article he was speaking

about moralization about the permanent

pressure that we have to make ethical

choices in our lives actually he said

let's stop moralizing each other and

let's start izing things because if you

need to think all the time about how

long you can shower if you need to slow

down on the road if there's fog on the

road Etc if you need to think about it

all the time and then ultimately the

pressure will be just too high let's

delegate or Outsource part of our ethics

to things so why not have an intelligent

speed adaptation system in cars that

slows down your car if there's fog on

the road we all know we should do it

many people fail to do it and there are

many accidents every year why not have a

water safing shower head a speed bump on

the road near school to make you slow

down if there are kids on the on the

street Etc so H AR really wanted to put

ethics into things and that actually

caused a lot of resistance people really

felt okay this is going back to

technocracy here Illustrated with the

image of modern times Charlie Chaplin

the machines taking over H AR house was

accused of giving up on human Freedom

wanting technology the machines to be

the boss of society as it were rather

than human beings I think that whole

idea that ethics is ultimately only

about autonomy that we need somehow to

defend human beings against Technologies

I think is an idea that we should really

uh somehow get rid of in our thinking

because that idea of autonomy as the

sole and most important thing to keep in

mind when designing things when thinking

about things is a major impediment a

major obstacle to think in a deeper way

about the ethics of

things still it's a very influential

idea if you look at current attempts to

think about the ethics of things many

approaches that are now trying to design

ethics into things also um well have

autonomy as a starting point persuasive

technology for instance BJ fog's big

project at Stanford uh is all focusing

on designing information technologies

that persuade people to change their

behavior by having an intelligent

interaction with how people behave but

the most important thing in ethical

terms there is that The Persuasions are

transparent that people know that they

are persuaded in order to keep up their

freedom or the nudge approach which is

currently also quite influential nudging

uh is the idea that you actually can

give people a specific push in a certain

direction in order to change their

behavior Taylor and sunstein are two

theorists uh in the US who have

developed this IDE and the whole idea of

nudging is that we need to design the

material infrastructure of our world in

which we make choices choices take place

they say in a choice architecture for

instance if a photocopying machine has

as a default setting to make

single-sided copies more people will

make single-sided copies if the default

setting is double-sided more people will

make double-sided copies thinking better

about this Choice infrastructure is a

task for designers they say and that

means that they actually defend some

kind of yeah you could say paternalism

we should actually design the right

choices in our things but not too much

they say it should be a Libertarian form

of uh yeah you say paternalism

libertarian because they want to keep up

Freedom there should always be an opt

out there should always be a possibility

for people to step out of the influences

being exerted upon them so autonomy is

really a central thing in the ethics of

things so how to deal with that ID or

the ethics of things

then I think um what we should do is to

solve somehow this blackmail of autonomy

as you could call it with them not to

Fuko the blackma of autonomy by then I

mean that there is some kind of idea

that whoever questions the relevance or

the importance of the concept of

autonomy is immediately accused of being

against Freedom or against the human

being of course I'm not against freedom

but I think it's it's really in the

service of design in the service of

people to move beyond the idea of

autonomy so how to get rid of this fear

for autonomy I think I should take us

into a short psycho therapy having some

ideas of Freud to help us here of course

I will not take you into a

psychoanalysis but I want to discuss

with you very briefly the ideas that

Freud had about our narcissistic

self-image and maybe we need to have a

bit a more humble idea of who we are

Freud explained that the scientist might

give us the idea that we are very

special very important but at the same

time they make us feel more humble like

for instance Copernicus who showed that

not everything is somehow rotating

around the Earth but the Earth is

rotating around the Sun the first blow

to our narcissistic self-image the

second one was by Darwin who showed that

we actually might be as close at least

as close to the Apes as we are to God

and he himself gave the third blow he

said claiming that what we see as our

self our person is actually only a form

of resistance against a lot of things

deep inside us that we don't even dare

to look straight into the eyes

maybe technology should be accepted as

the fourth blow to our narcissistic

self-image the fourth blow in the sense

that technology is also well a reason

for us to think in a more humble way

about our autonomy and in order to

explain that to you I would like to

discuss with you that idea of the

morality of things I think there are

good reasons to claim that there is

ethics in things and that actually for

people who really believe in autonomy is

maybe the worst thing to claim I mean if

the machines help to shape our ethics

now we are lost right we are the ones

who determine what's good and what's bad

if technology is going to tell us that

what could remain of humanity and human

dignity still I think if you look

carefully at some technologies around us

that the IDE is actually quite common

and might help us to take those ideas

very seriously for instance um the uh

coin lock in a supermarket cart a very

mundane technology which embodies a

clear norm and the norm return the cart

to the place where you got it when you

started to do your shopping of course

the the price of the thing is much

higher than the 50 EUR cents we need to

put into it it's kind of a nut you don't

buy it for the 50 cents there's a norm

embodied in that you return the car to

the place where you got it that can also

be values in things for instance if you

uh look at the design of Shaving devices

there's a clear difference between many

uh lady shaves and shaving devices for

men if you own this lady shave and it

breaks down uh there no way to open it

there are no screws they're sealed so

apparently if a woman has a problem with

her device she's not supposed to be

interested in or capable of opening her

device men to the country typically get

some kind of an exploded view with their

technology uh and uh also if they're

lucky some kind of little toolbox with a

screwdriver to open it and a brush to do

some some maintenance and there's

completely different idea of masculinity

and femininity in the very design of

these Technologies so there are values

embedded in Technologies too another

example um Technologies can actually

also play a profound role in our moral

decisions in the Frameworks on the basis

of which we make choices and a very nice

example of this I borrow from Anar Mo a

Dutch Anthropologist and philosopher and

that example is the anti-c conceptive

pill anarie once made a very interesting

analysis of the role of the anti-c

conceptive pill in Liberation and she

said well obviously it played a huge

role in The Liberation of women because

since we have the anti-c conceptive pill

not only men but also women can enjoy

sex without having to have the burden

and to run the risk to get a child from

there

but much more importantly or at least as

important she claims is the role of the

pill in the liberation of homosexuals

which is a ctive ID of course because

homosexuals don't need the pill but in a

sense that's part of the argumentation

because the interesting point that she

makes is that until the large scale

introduction of the pill in the 1960s a

rather self-evident argument against

homosexuality was that it was unnatural

or strange or weird to have sex with

somebody with whom you could never get a

child but of course since we have the

pill we completely dis connected well

not completely and we still have to have

sex to get a child still but we

disconnected sexuality and un

reproduction so against that background

apparently we have changed our ideas of

what ethics is and about how to do

ethics which is a big thing I think so

what we need to do I think is to develop

a different approach to the relations

between humans and Technologies not

dividing the world into two categories

the subjects and the objects and the

subjects have freedom and intentions and

the object are that and mute at best

instruments for humans to realize their

intentions there is more technology in

us than we think we are fundamentally

technologically mediated beings I think

that Insight that technological

mediation is somehow the basis of our

existence is a very very important

Insight in our world and uh you can

borrow those ideas and deepen them from

studying the work of D ID a North

American philosopher of Technology who

had this postphenomenological approach

to technology where technology is not

seen as something opposed to the human

being but technology is kind of a medium

for how we live our lives a medium for

experience a medium for actions

Technologies are mediators so rather

than seeing the human being as an

autonomous being he sees the human being

as a fundamentally technologically

mediated

being so having blurred the boundaries

between humans and technology is a bit

then what remains of the ethics of

design because two major obstacles occur

now uh to keep out that idea of autonomy

as the most Central value to keep in

mind when designing Behavior influencing

Technologies first of all that theory of

mediation shows that any design whether

you want it or not does have an impact

on human behavior there is no way to get

around an impact so autonomy in that

sense is a fiction we only have mediated

actions mediated perception any

technology you design will have some

kind of an impact will not only be

functional but will help to shape how

people live their lives and secondly the

moral Frameworks from which we

assess these mediations themselves are

also mediated by Technologies there is

no outside place from which we can

assess a technology in terms of if it's

good or bad so that's a very Central

Insight I think and we should take that

to the design of Technology the ethics

of design should then not only be by the

question are we allowed or are we not

allowed to influence the behavior of

people the question is more how do we

give a good shape to this influence and

a major source of inspiration for me

there is the work of Michelle Fuko

Michelle Fuko French thinker has

developed a lot of ethical thoughts in

his last two books just before he he

died most people know him of the

philosopher as as the think about power

power relations the overwhelming powers

in society but his last two books are

about the ethics of dealing with power

and those ideas I developed with st

dorin a design thinker here from tent

those ideas uh that he developed can be

very nicely applied to technological

mediation the core IDE of Fuko is that

we should not somehow oppose power but

that we should see Power as the

foundations of our existence as it were

power is the basis for the way in which

we live our lives so ethics is not about

getting rid of power but about entering

into a productive interaction with power

it results in an Ethics that does not

step outside of the situation you want

to assess and have a normative framework

in your hand and say this is what we

should do this is what we not what you

should not do it's an Ethics from within

within the situation you try to make a

judgment you take seriously that even

your moral framework is mediated by

Technologies and you try to arrange the

framework itself that results in a

completely different idea of Ethics the

major concept that Fuko developed to

explain that idea is the Technologies of

the self which is already a very nice

combination of subject and object

technology and self so he says ethics is

not about getting rid of power or in my

words of mediation it's about finding a

productive interaction with power

shaping yourself in interaction with

these mediations so it's shaping

yourself designing yourself and that has

two Dimensions you could say If you

think about the interaction between

humans and Technologies the first one is

the dimension of use fod there speaks

about subjectivation it's interesting

there you hear an echo of the word

subjection you sub subject yourself to

the powers in order to become a subject

and it's not a passive subjection and

you are the victim of Technology it's an

active some kind of critical way of

doing this

if you have an ultrasound scan made of

your unborn child you can just uh see

that as a fact that happens but you can

also try to understand what that

ultrasound scan is doing to the way in

which you experience your unborn child

how you suddenly become responsible for

diseases that your child could get how

you become a new parent not only

expecting but also having to choose

about the life of your unborn child how

your unborn child becomes a potential

patient seeing that understanding that

is part of the Technologies of the self

but most importantly I think it also

helps us to to design Technologies to

design morality in technology and that

is in a sense quite a big step the idea

that we can design ethics in technology

is not a very self-evident thing to

do um still I think we need to do that

um not only because uh well as I said

there is no way to get around all these

mediations but especially because it's

very important to take seriously how we

can have this interaction this free

interaction with Technologies so the

most important thing to keep in mind is

that if you influence people's behavior

with technology it's not about saving

autonomy against the impact of

technology it's all about how to deal

with that impact so many people would

feel that autonomy needs to be saved but

actually the influence that Technologies

can have upon us are not only about

overpowering us and the work that Nik

Trum did with Paul Hecker and myself in

Del and in tent very nicely shows that

that actually you can say that there are

at least four types of influence that

the technology can have on human beings

first of all you have a dimension of the

visibility of the impact and second you

have a dimension of uh you could say the

force of the impact so you have highly

visible and highly influential impacts

so then you speak about coercion an

automatic speed limiter in cars A system

that makes cars slow down when there's

fog on the road but a persuasive

technology is highly visible but has a

weak impact it gives you an advice to do

something a system in primary schools

that gives children a signal if they

forget to wash their hands after using

the toilet they don't need to do that it

becomes more scary for many people I

think if uh the impact is more hidden so

for instance you can have hidden and

strong impacts like designing a building

without an elevator so that people have

to use the stairs and they exercise more

that can be a deliberate intention of a

designer without people being aware of

that there are also hidden weak impacts

a seduction you could say helping to

seduce people to do something so for

instance I've been working for a while

with a group of industrial designers who

try to design for sustainability and

their core idea was that actually they

should help people to get more

attachment to the things that they use

the main problem they said in our

environmental crisis is that we throw

away our stuff way too soon long before

they're actually worn out so how could

we make sure that people get more

attachment to those things one of the

things that they designed for instance

secret Smiths did that at einhoven

University she designed the uphol tree

for a couch which is actually a two-

layer uphol tree where the top layer

when it wears out shows the second layer

so actually the couch has a second skin

it gets younger by getting older it gets

newer by getting older which of course

is not a way to force people to keep

that couch but it's a way that seduces

people to to to stay attached to it even

when it gets older I think if we open

our minds for ideas like this and the

whole idea of autonomy becomes less and

less important of course we should not

choose against freedom but basically I

think all the values that we have that

we find so important in our culture we

can still install if we give up the idea

that we need to somehow protect humans

against the impact of technology it's

rather finding a good way of dealing

with that impact so I hope that

designers can replace the word autonomy

with the word mediation and that they

can foster in their work the ways in

which people can appropriate the these

mediations in which people can develop

Technologies of the self can well enter

into practice of shaping their existence

in interaction with Technologies and

most of all I hope that they can

actively engage in the moralization of

Technologies because if there's one

thing I think that we can learn from the

ID that there's an ethics of things that

designing is actually doing ethics but

by other means thank you

[Music]