首页> 外文期刊>Bioethics >Progress bias versus status quo bias in the ethics of emerging science and technology
【24h】

Progress bias versus status quo bias in the ethics of emerging science and technology

机译:新兴科技伦理界面进展偏见与现状

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

How should we handle ethical issues related to emerging science and technology in a rational way? This is a crucial issue in our time. On the one hand, there is great optimism with respect to technology. On the other, there is pessimism. As both perspectives are based on scarce evidence, they may appear speculative and irrational. Against the pessimistic perspective to emerging technology, it has been forcefully argued that there is a status quo bias (SQB) fuelling irrational attitudes to emergent science and technology and greatly hampering useful development and implementation. Therefore, this article starts by analysing the SQB using human enhancement as a case study. It reveals that SQB may not be as prominent in restricting the implementation of emergent technologies as claimed in the ethics literature, because SQB (a) is fuelled by other and weaker drivers than those addressed in the literature, (b) is at best one amongst many drivers of attitudes towards emergent science and technology, and (c) may not be a particularly prominent driver of irrational decision-making. While recognizing that SQB can be one driver behind pessimism, this article investigates other and counteracting forces that may be as strong as SQB. Progress bias is suggested as a generic term for the various drivers of unwarranted science and technology optimism. Based on this analysis, a test for avoiding or reducing this progress bias is proposed. Accordingly, we should recognize and avoid a broad range of biases in the assessment of emerging and existing science and technology in order to promote an open and transparent deliberation.
机译:我们本如何以理性的方式处理与新兴科技有关的道德问题?这是我们时代的至关重要问题。一方面,关于技术存在很大的乐观情绪。另一方面,有悲观主义。随着两个观点都是基于稀缺证据,它们可能出现投机和非理性。反对新兴技术的悲观观点,有力地认为,有一种地位偏见(SQB)为紧急科技的非理性态度以及极大地阻碍了有用的开发和实施。因此,本文首先使用人类增强作为案例研究分析SQB。它揭示了SQB在限制伦理文献中所声称的紧急技术的实施方面可能不会突出,因为SQB(A)由其他和较弱的驱动因素推动,而不是文献中的那些,(B)是最好的许多对紧急科学和技术的态度,(c)可能不是一个特别突出的非理性决策司机。虽然认识到SQB可以成为悲观主义背后的一个驾驶员,但本文调查了可能与SQB一样强大的其他和抵制力量。进度偏见被建议为无名的科技乐观的各种驱动因素的普遍术语。基于该分析,提出了一种避免或减少这一进展偏差的测试。因此,我们应该识别并避免在评估新兴和现有的科学和技术方面广泛的偏见,以促进开放和透明的审议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号