Digital media has become an integral part of people’s lives (at least, for those who live in the developed world), and its ubiquity and pervasiveness in our everyday lives raise new ethical, social, cultural, political, economic and legal issues. Although many of these issues have already been taken up by researchers, they are primarily being dealt with in terms of what is ‘right’ or ‘just’ with digital media and digitally-mediated practices. And, questions about the relations between digital media and the good life are often left in the background. In other words, what is often missing is an explicit discussion of the relations between digital media and the good life, especially in a more balanced and constructive manner. Under the label of ‘Net recommendation’, the present study aims to offer a more balanced and constructive normative analysis of digital media, focusing on the relations between digital media and the good life. The project of Net recommendation aims to (re)assert the importance of actual discourses in our normative analysis of the relations between digital media and the good life. In the present study, I pursue the project of Net recommendation with a Walzerian approach to digital media and the good life that takes seriously (and, ideally, also interacts with) actual discourses. This approach, as I shall argue, allows us to have a better understanding of our normative judgements on the impacts of digital media has (or will have) on the good life and, at the same time, allows us to answer…
Work in progress – Please do not cite, quote or summarise or circulate without permission. Extended Abstract for The 4th ICTs and Society Conference, Uppsala University, Sweden There is never a shortage of celebratory and condemnatory popular discourse on the Internet and the Web even in its early days. Although the hopes and dreams of the Internet and the Web have faded with the burst of dot-com bubble in 1990s and the rise of control and surveillance over and through information technology after September 11, 2003, the advent of Web 2.0, with its newly proclaimed potential and promise, has rejuvenated the hopes and dreams of the enthusiasts and renewed the popular discourse on the Internet and the Web. I shall argue that researchers should not take lightly the popular discourse on the Internet and Web 2.0, as it can deepen our understanding of the axiological foundation(s) of our judgements towards them. Looking at some of the most representative examples available (e.g. Andrew Keen’s Cult of Amateur, Clay Shirky’s Here Comes Everybody and Cognitive Surplus, Nicholas Carr’s The Shallow, Jaron Lanier’s You are Not a Gadget and Nick Bilton’s I Live in the Future & Here’s How It Works), I examine this (new) wave of popular discourse, focusing on the (new) worries and doubts voiced by the alarmists and the (new) hopes and dreams portrayed by the enthusiasts. More specifically, I will examine the problem representation (i.e. what problems are being represented and how they are represented) and axiologisation (i.e. what benefits…
In: Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 10 (1), 19 – 35. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce an interpretive approach to examining the relation between ICTs and the good life, based on Michael Walzer’s view of (connected) social criticism. Design/methodology/approach – Through a discussion of Michael Walzer’s view of social criticism, an interpretive approach to normative analysis of ICTs and the good life is introduced. The paper also offers an additional argument for the indispensability of prudential appraisals of ICTs in normative analysis of ICTs and the good life, which in turn strengthens the basis for the Walzerian approach proposed in the paper. Findings – It is argued that an interpretive approach to normative analysis of ICTs and the good life, i.e. the Walzerian approach, is as viable as – if not superior to – a theory-driven approach. It is also argued that actual appraisals of ICTs and the good life must be taken into account in the normative analysis. Originality/value – It is only recently that “the good life” has become more visible in normative analysis of ICTs. This paper continues this relatively new line of research and proposes an alternative approach – as opposed to a theory-driven approach – to this research programme. Full Text Available at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/fwd.htm?id=aob&ini=aob&doi=10.1108/14779961211210630
Well-being in Contemporary Society International Conference on the Philosophy and Science of Well-being and their Practical Importance Location: University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands Date: July 26-27, 2012 Program Chair: Philip Brey (University of Twente) Organising committee: Johnny Hartz Søraker (University of Twente) Pak-Hang Wong (University of Twente) Jan-Willem van der Rijt (University of Amsterdam) Jelle de Boer (University of Amsterdam) About the Conference In recent years, well-being has enjoyed a renaissance in philosophical discussions, as well as in fields like psychology, economics, development studies and sociology. Although these approaches share a common goal – to better understand what well-being is and how it can be enhanced – these developments have led to a great diversity in philosophical and scientific approaches to the analysis of well-being. Despite the increasing amount of research, most of the work on well-being is also performed at a highly abstract level. This is especially true in philosophy, but relatively little work has been devoted to the application of theories of well-being also in other fields, in particular when it comes to an understanding of life in contemporary society. Developments such as globalization, consumerism, and the rapid innovation and use of new and emerging technologies, all exert significant impact on the well-being of people living today, and we need a better understanding of their consequences for well-being. Contemporary society requires that well-being researchers examine these problems – and, if possible, propose solutions to address them. This international conference aims to bring together researchers from various disciplines, including,…
(This post also appears on Warp, Weft, and Way.) As an on-going project (see also, Dao, Harmony and Personhood: Towards a Confucian Ethics of Technology), I have attempted to analyse new media (or, information technology) from a Confucian perspective. But, it is only until recently that I really started to examine the relation between (or, in fact, the compatibility of) social media and the Confucian way of life. And, I started with the hope that Confucian ethics/Confucian philosophy will have something positive to contribute to the existing philosophical discussion on the benefits and harms. Unfortunately, when I proceed with my analysis, it becomes apparent that the Confucian way of life seems to be rather incompatible with the design (and, depends on how one theorises the relations between design and use, use) of social media. So, the obvious question is: Is the Confucian way of life impractical and/or inadequate, if social media is here to stay? Intuitively, my answer is no; but, at the moment, I have difficulties to articulate it. Anyhow, it might well due to my defected exposition of the Confucian way of life that leads to this negative conclusion. Any comments and suggestions are welcome!