Advertisement

Ethics and Information Technology

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 11–25 | Cite as

Maintaining the reversibility of foldings: Making the ethics (politics) of information technology visible

  • Lucas D. IntronaEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper will address the question of the morality of technology. I believe this is an important question for our contemporary society in which technology, especially information technology, is increasingly becoming the default mode of social ordering. I want to suggest that the conventional manner of conceptualising the morality of technology is inadequate – even dangerous. The conventional view of technology is that technology represents technical means to achieve social ends. Thus, the moral problem of technology, from this perspective, is the way in which the given technical means are applied to particular (good or bad) social ends. In opposition to this I want to suggest that the assumed separation, of this approach, between technical means and social ends are inappropriate. It only serves to hide the most important political and ethical dimensions of technology. I want to suggest that the morality of technology is much more embedded and implicit than such a view would suggest. In order to critique this approach I will draw on phenomenology and the more recent work of Bruno Latour. With these intellectual resources in mind I will propose disclosive ethics as a way to make the morality of technology visible. I will give a brief account of this approach and show how it might guide our␣understanding of the ethics and politics of technology by considering two examples of contemporary information technology: search engines and plagiarism detection systems.

Keywords

disclosive ethics design Heidegger politics Latour technology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Achterhuis H. (1995) De moralisering van de apparaten. Socialisme en Democratie 52(1):3–12Google Scholar
  2. Berg A., Lie M. (1995) Feminism and Constructivism: Do Artifacts Have Gender? Science, Technology and Human Values 20(3):332–351Google Scholar
  3. Bijker W.E. (1995) Of Bicycles, Bakelites and Bulbs Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge MA, MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  4. Bijker W.E., Hughes T.P., Pinch T.J. (1987) The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Cambridge, MA, MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  5. Borgmann A. (1984) Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life. Chicago, IL, Chicago University PressGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowker G.C., Star S.L. (1999) Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA, MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  7. Brey P. (1997) Philosophy of Technology meets Social Constructivism, Techné. Journal of the Society for Philosophy and Technology 2(3/4):56–79Google Scholar
  8. Brey P. (1999) The Ethics of Representation and Action in Virtual Reality. Ethics and Information Technology 1(1):5–14CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Brey P. (2004) Ethical Aspects of Face Recognition Systems in Public Places. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 2(2):97–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Callon M. (1987) Society in the Making: The Study of Technology as a Tool for Sociological Analysis. In: Bijker W.E., Hughes T.P., Pinch T.J. (eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge,MA, MIT Press, pp. 83–103Google Scholar
  11. Caputo J.D. (1993) Against Ethics. Indianapolis, Indiana University PressGoogle Scholar
  12. J. Cho, H. Garcia-Molina, and L. Page. Efficient crawling through URL ordering, Paper presented at the Seventh International World Wide Web Conference, Brisbane, Australia, 14–18 April 1998Google Scholar
  13. Conley T. (2005) Folds and Folding. In: Stivale C.J. (ed), Gilles Deleuze: Key Concepts. Montreal, McGill-Queen’s University Press, pp. 170–181Google Scholar
  14. Critchley S. (1999) The Ethics of Deconstruction: Derrida and Levinas, 2nd edition. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University PressGoogle Scholar
  15. Critchley S. (2004) Is There a Normative Deficit in the Theory of Hegemony?. In Critchley S., Marchant O. (eds), Laclau: A Critical Reader. London, Routledge, pp. 113–122Google Scholar
  16. Foucault M. (1994) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. London, RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Friedman B., Nissenbaum H. (1996) Bias in Computer Systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 14(3):330–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Graham S, Wood D. (2003) Digitizing Surveillance: Categorization, Space and inequality. Critical Social Policy 20(2):227–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. M. Heidegger, Being and Time, trans John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. New York, Harper and Row (1927/1962)Google Scholar
  20. Heidegger M. (1977) The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays. New York, Harper TorchbooksGoogle Scholar
  21. Howard R.M. (1995) Plagiarisms, Authorships, and the Academic Death Penalty. College English 57(1):788–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Howard R.M. (1993) A Plagiarism Pentimento. Journal of Teaching Writing 11(2):233–245Google Scholar
  23. L.D. Introna. Oppression, Resistance and Information Technology: Some Thoughts on Design and Values, Design for Values. Ethical, Social and Political Dimensions of Information Technology workshop sponsored by the NSF DIMACS, Princeton University, USA, 27 February to 1 March, 1998Google Scholar
  24. L.D. Introna. On the Ethics of (Object) Things. paper presented at the Critical Management Conference 3, Lancaster University, England, 17–19 July 2004. Available at http://www.lums.lancs.ac.uk/publications/viewpdf/000235/ (Last accessed on 18/07/2006)
  25. Introna L.D., Ilharco F.M. (2006) The Meaning of Screens: Towards a Phenomenological Account of Screenness. Human Studies 29(1):57–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Introna L.D., Nissenbaum H. (2000) The Internet as a Democratic Medium: Why the Politics of Search Engines Matters. The Information Society, 16(3):169–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. L.D. Introna and L. Whittaker. Power, Cash and Convenience: Translations in the Political Site of the ATM. The Information Society, 22(5): 325–340, 2006Google Scholar
  28. Introna L.D., Wood D. (2004) Picturing Algorithmic Surveillance: The Politics of Facial Recognition Systems. Surveillance and Society 2(2/3):177–98Google Scholar
  29. Lathrop A. (2000) Student Cheating and Plagiarism in the Internet Era: A Wake-up Call. Englewood CO, Libraries UnlimitedGoogle Scholar
  30. Latour B. (1992) Where are the Missing Masses? Sociology of a Few Mundane Artefacts. In: Bijker W., Law J. (eds), Shaping Technology, Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press, pp. 225–258Google Scholar
  31. Latour B. (1999) Pandora’s Hope Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  32. B. Latour. The Promise of Constructivism. In D. Ihde and E. Selinger, editors, Chasing Technoscience: Matrix for Materiality, pp. 27–46. Bloomington and Indianapolis, Indiana University Press, 2003Google Scholar
  33. Latour B. (1991) Technology is Society made Durable. In Law J. (eds), A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power. Technology and Domination, London, Routledge, pp. 103–31Google Scholar
  34. Latour B. (2002) Morality and Technology: The End of the Means. Theory, Culture and Society 19(5/6):247–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Law J. (1991) The Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power. Technology and Domination, London, RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  36. S. Lawrence and C.L. Giles, Accessibility and Distribution of Information on the Web, 1999Google Scholar
  37. Leki I., Carson J. (1997) Completely Different Worlds: EAP and the Writing Experiences of ESL Students in University Courses. TESOL Quarterly 31(1):39–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. D.A. Norman. The Psychology of Every day Things. Basic Books, New York, NY, 1988Google Scholar
  39. Pfaffenberger B. (1992) Technological Dramas. Science, Technology, and Human Values 17:282–312Google Scholar
  40. Roig M. (2001) Plagiarism and Paraphrasing Criteria of College and University Professors. Ethics and Behavior 11(3):307–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schatzki T.R. (2005) The Sites of Organizations. Organization Studies 26(3):465–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schatzki T.R. (2002) The Site of the Social. A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change. University Park Penn, Pennsylvania University PressGoogle Scholar
  43. S. Schleimer, D. Wilkerson and A. Aiken (2003) Winnowing: Local Algorithms for Document Fingerprinting. Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, June 2003, 76–85Google Scholar
  44. Shi L. (2004) Textual Borrowing in Second-Language Writing. Written Communication 21(2):171–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sismondo S. (1993) Some Social Constructions. Social Studies of Science 23(3):515–553Google Scholar
  46. Verbeek P.P. (2005) What Things Do – Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. Penn State, Penn State University PressGoogle Scholar
  47. Verbeek P.P. (2006) Materializing Morality – Design Ethics and Technological Mediation. Science, Technology and Human Values 31(3):361–380CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  48. Winner L. (1993) Upon Opening the Black Box and Finding it Empty: Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Technology. Science, Technology, and Human Values 18(3):362–78Google Scholar
  49. J. Woodward, C. Horn, J. Gatune and A. Thomas. Biometrics: A Look at Facial Recognition. Documented Briefing prepared for the Virginia State Crime Commission (2003). Available at http://www.rand.org

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Organisation, Work and Technology Lancaster UniversityManagement School Lancaster UniversityLancasterUK

Personalised recommendations