Department of Philosophy, University of Twente, Postbus 217, 7500 AE Enschede, TheNetherlands.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2012 Mar;18(1):35-48. doi: 10.1007/s11948-010-9233-3. Epub 2010 Sep 24.
The standard response to engineering disasters like the Deepwater Horizon case is to ascribe full moral responsibility to individuals and to collectives treated as individuals. However, this approach is inappropriate since concrete action and experience in engineering contexts seldom meets the criteria of our traditional moral theories. Technological action is often distributed rather than individual or collective, we lack full control of the technology and its consequences, and we lack knowledge and are uncertain about these consequences. In this paper, I analyse these problems by employing Kierkegaardian notions of tragedy and moral responsibility in order to account for experiences of the tragic in technological action. I argue that ascription of responsibility in engineering contexts should be sensitive to personal experiences of lack of control, uncertainty, role conflicts, social dependence, and tragic choice. I conclude that this does not justify evading individual and corporate responsibility, but inspires practices of responsibility ascription that are less 'harsh' on those directly involved in technological action, that listen to their personal experiences, and that encourage them to gain more knowledge about what they are doing.
对于像“深水地平线”这样的工程灾难,标准的应对方法是将全部道德责任归咎于个人和被视为个人的集体。然而,这种方法并不合适,因为工程背景下的具体行动和经验很少符合我们传统道德理论的标准。技术行动通常是分散的,而不是个人或集体的;我们对技术及其后果缺乏完全的控制,并且对这些后果知之甚少,存在不确定性。在本文中,我通过运用克尔凯郭尔的悲剧和道德责任概念来分析这些问题,以说明技术行动中的悲剧体验。我认为,在工程背景下,责任的归属应该对缺乏控制、不确定性、角色冲突、社会依赖和悲剧选择等个人经历保持敏感。我得出的结论是,这并不是为了逃避个人和企业的责任,而是激励责任归属的实践,对直接参与技术行动的人不那么“苛刻”,倾听他们的个人经历,并鼓励他们更多地了解自己的所作所为。