The Ethics of Technology: A Geometric Analysis of Five Moral Principles proposes five moral principles for analyzing ethical issues related to engineering and technology. The objections raised by several authors to the multidimensional scaling technique used in the book reveal a lack of familiarity with this widely used technique.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
The five principles are formulated as follows: A technological intervention, to which the principle is applicable, is morally right only if…
CBA: the net surplus of benefits over costs for all those affected is at least as large as that of every alternative.
PP: reasonable precautionary measures are taken to safeguard against uncertain but non-negligible threats.
ST: the technological intervention does not lead to any significant long-term depletion of natural, social or economic resources.
AUT: the technological intervention does not reduce the independence, self-governance or freedom of the people affected by it.
FP: the technological intervention does not lead to unfair inequalities among the people affected by it.
The most influential study on casuistry in recent years is Albert Jonsen and Stephen Toulmin’s book The abuse of casuistry: A history of moral reasoning (1988).
Note that casuists reject the notion of moral principles embraced by advocates of the geometric method.
The experiment was approved by the Texas A&M Institutional Review Board, decision IRB2015-0281D.
Aristotle. (1985). Nicomachean ethics (T. Irwin, trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub. Co.
Gärdenfors, P. (2000). Conceptual spaces: The geometry of thought. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Gärdenfors, P. (2014). The geometry of meaning: Semantics based on conceptual spaces. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Jonsen, A. R., & Toulmin, S. E. (1988). The abuse of casuistry: A history of moral reasoning. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kruskal, J. B., & Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional scaling. New York: Sage Publications.
Lokhorst, G. J. C. (2018). Review of Martin Peterson: The ethics of technology. Science and Engineering Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-0014-0.
Peterson, M. (2013). The dimensions of consequentialism: Ethics, equality and risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Peterson, M. (2017). The ethics of technology: A geometric analysis of five moral principles. New York: Oxford University Press.
Shrader-Frechette, K. (2017). Review of Martin Peterson: The ethics of technology. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. University of Notre Dame, October 30, 2017. Web. November 11, 2017. <http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/the-ethics-of-technology-a-geometric-analysis-of-five-moral-principles/>.
Stewart, A., Prandy, K., & Blackburn, R. M. (1973). Measuring the class structure. Nature, 245, 415–417.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.
The author wishes to thank Ed Harris and Glen Miller for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.
About this article
Cite this article
Peterson, M. The Ethics of Technology: Response to Critics. Sci Eng Ethics 24, 1645–1652 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0062-0
- The ethics of technology
- Multidimensional scaling
- Moral similarity
- Conceptual spaces
- Kristin Shrader-Frechette
- Gert-Jan Lokhorst