Moralizing Technology and the ethics of things | Peter-Paul Verbeek | TEDxTwenteU
Summary
TLDRThe 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
- ๐ค The concept of ethics in things challenges the traditional view that ethics is a human domain because things, unlike humans, lack freedom and intentions.
- ๐ 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.
- ๐ ๏ธ There's resistance to the idea of embedding ethics in technology, with critics fearing a loss of human autonomy and an increase in technocracy.
- ๐ 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.
- ๐ Persuasive technology and nudging are current approaches to ethical design, aiming to influence behavior while maintaining transparency and freedom of choice.
- ๐ 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.
- ๐ The 'morality of things' is evident in everyday technologies like coin locks on shopping carts, which embody norms and values.
- ๐ The contraceptive pill is highlighted as a technology that has profoundly influenced moral decisions and societal views on sexuality and reproduction.
- ๐ง Don Ihde's postphenomenological approach views technology not as separate from humans but as a medium that shapes our experiences and actions.
- ๐ ๏ธ Designing technology with ethics in mind is not just about permission but about how to positively shape the influence technology has on human behavior.
- ๐ 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 Arousโ 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 Foucaultโs 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
๐ก 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 thingsโlike speed adaptation systems in cars or water-saving showerheadsโcan 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.
๐ง 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 (Earthโs 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.
๐ 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.
โ๏ธ 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 technologyโs 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 Foucaultโs '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.
๐ 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.
๐ง 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.
Mindmap
Keywords
๐กEthics of Things
๐กMoralization of Devices
๐กTechnocracy
๐กPersuasive Technology
๐กNudge Theory
๐กAutonomy
๐กPaternalism
๐กPsychotherapy
๐กNarcissistic Self-Image
๐กTechnological Mediation
๐กPostphenomenology
๐กTechnologies of the Self
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]
Browse More Related Video
Digital ethics and the future of humans in a connected world | Gerd Leonhard | TEDxBrussels
Ethics in the age of technology | Juan Enriquez | TEDx SHORTS
The future of technology and Humanity: a provocative film by Futurist Speaker Gerd Leonhard
Communication Illusion and Brain-Based Solution | Nikolaos Dimitriadis | TEDxUniversityofStrathclyde
How ethics will change the future of technology | Olivia Gambelin | TEDxPatras
Digital Transformation: Interview with David Edgerton, Kingโs College London
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)