Abstract
This chapter investigates normative dimensions of technologies based on an understanding of technologies as socio-technological systems. As such systems display technologies as both technical and social, they call for a corresponding clarification of the relationship between epistemic and ethico-political activities. The notion of the ethos of socio-technological systems is suggested to denote the immanent worth of the system. Analysis of the formation of the ethos brings forward how normative concerns we recognise respectively as epistemic and ethico-political are intertwined. The notion of the ethos of socio-technical systems is presented and discussed with reference to a Norwegian controversy on the ultrasound screening programme for pregnant women.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Following the original presentation of this paper, Peter-Paul Verbeek published a work (2011) in which he found obstetric ultrasound to be a rewarding case for moral reflection on technology and raises questions similar to my own. While Verbeek investigates the moral dimension of materiality by turning to Michel Foucault’s work as well as the phenomenological tradition, I turn to the philosophical anthropology of Charles Taylor.
- 2.
Lene Skogstrøm. “Engelsk ultralydstudie med oppsiktsvekkende resultater: Avdekker Downs syndrom tidligere.” Aftenposten (3.8.1998).
- 3.
Berge Solberg. “Hvor går ultralydforskningen ved NTNU?” Vitenskapsteoretisk forum, MTFS at NTNU, Trondheim (16.05.2000).
- 4.
Sturla Eik-Nes, Kåre Molne, Harm-Gerd Blaas, Kjell Salvesen. “Ultralyd tidleg i svangerskapet – styring eller trussel?” Aftenposten (01.11.1999).
- 5.
“Tidlig ultralyd er betenkelig.” An NTB text printed in VG (3.8.1998).
- 6.
“Vil stanse tidlig ultralyd.” An NTB text printed in VG (15.10.1999).
- 7.
“Bøyde av for helseministeren.” Adresseavisen (16.10.1999).
- 8.
“Politikerne støtter Eik-Nes.” Adresseavisen (22.10.1999); “Ville utsette ultralydprosjekt: NTNU-leder kraftig ut mot helseministeren.” Aftenposten (1.11.1999); “NTNU støtter Eik-Nes.” Adresseavisen (2.11.1999); Emil Spjøtvoll. “Vitenskap og Politikk”; “Vil ha friere tøyler.” Universitetsavisa (4.11.1999); “Fingrene av fatet, statsråd!” Universitetsavisa (18.11.1999).
- 9.
“Mot Veggen.” Universitetsavisa (21.10.1999); “Frittalende forsker.” UKE-Adressa (13.11.99).
- 10.
See for instance Hans Olav Tungesvik. “Skal teknikken ein gong gå føre etikken?” Aftenposten (12.11.1999); “To av barna kunne ha vært valgt bort.” Adresseavisen (13.11.1999); Inge Johansen. “Ultralydprosjektet ved regionsykehuset.” Adresseavisen (17.11.1999); “Ultralyd: Frigjørende – eller undertrykkende?” Universitetsavisa (18.11.1999); Torvid Kiserud. “Ultralyd i tidlig svangerskap.” Aftenposten (23.11.1999); “Ultralyd, medier og en mor.” Adresseavisen (25.11.1999).
- 11.
“Ap-folk stør oppgjør med ultralyd-prosjekt.” Vårt Land (25.10.99).
- 12.
“Knuser ultralydprosjektet.” Adresseavisen (24.11.1999).
- 13.
“Ventet på rapport I 20 år.”, “Som en ripe i lakken.” Adresseavisen (4.12.1999).
- 14.
“Avviser kritikken.” Adressavisen (24.11.1999); “Skuffet Eik-Nes.” Adresseavisen (18.12.1999).
- 15.
Seminar on foetal diagnostics at Stortinget, Norway’s national assembly, Oslo (20.01.2000).
- 16.
Berit Schei. “Hvor går ultralydforskningen ved NTNU?” Vitenskapsteoretisk forum, MTFS, Trondheim (16.05.2000).
References
Andersen, Ø. (1995). I retorikkens hage. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Bergsjø, P. (1997). Ultralydundersøkelse som rutine i svangerskapsomsorgen. Tidsskrift for den Norske legeforening, 117, 2292.
Gulbrandsen, P. (2000). Hva er galt ved selektiv abort? Tidsskrift for den Norske legeforening, 120, 1072–1073.
Helsediraktoratet. (1991). Bruk av ultralyd i svangerskapet (pp. 1–91). Oslo: Helsedirektoratets retningslinjer.
Hughes, T. P. (1983). Networks of power. Electrification in Western Society, 1880–1930. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Hughes, T. P. (1986). The seamless web: Technology, science, etcetera, etcetera. Social Studies of Science, 16, 281–292.
Jasanoff, S. (2004). States of knowledge: The co-production of science and the social order. London: Routledge.
Latour, B. (1999). Pandora’s hope. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Merton, R. K. (1996). The normative structure of science. In H. Nowotny & K. Taschwer (Eds.), The sociology of the sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 38–49). Northampton: Edward Elgar. (Original work published 1946)
NFR. (1995). Bruk av ultralyd i svangerskapet: konsensuskonferanse 28. februar–1. mars 1995. Oslo: Norges forskningsråd.
Sætnan, A. R. (1995). Just what the doctor ordered? A study of medical technology innovation processes (STS-rapport; nr 25). Trondheim : Universitetet i Trondheim, Senter for teknologi og samfunn.
Taylor, C. (1985a). What is human agency. In Human agency and language (Philosophical papers, Vol. I). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, C. (1985b). The concept of a person. In Human agency and language (Philosophical papers, Vol. I). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Verbeek, P.-P. (2011). Moralizing technology: Understanding and designing the morality of things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Ziman, J. (1998). Why must scientists become more ethically sensitive than they used to be? Science, 282, 1813–1814.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Berge Solberg, Bengt Molander, Bjørn Myskja and Sophia Efstathiou for valuable discussions and comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nydal, R. (2013). Normative Crossover: The Ethos of Socio-technological Systems. In: Michelfelder, D., McCarthy, N., Goldberg, D. (eds) Philosophy and Engineering: Reflections on Practice, Principles and Process. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 15. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7762-0_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7762-0_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-7761-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-7762-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)