russo spt-homopoieticus
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
The homo poieticus and the bridge between physis and techne
Federica RussoPhilosophy, Kent
2
Overview
Physis and techne in the digital era
The homo poieticus in the e-nvironment
The homo poieticusAs technoscientistAs philosopher
Ethics meets epistemology?
3
PHYSIS AND TECHNEIN THE DIGITAL ERA
4
Physis: nature and reality
Techne: practical science and creation of artefacts
Inforgs: informational organisms We, intelligent humans. Intelligent engineered artefacts
Infosphere: informational environmentThe whole space of possible information, including Nature.
5
The digital revolution
The fourth revolution (Floridi 2008, 2009)
We, humans, are inforgs in the infosphere
A change in the interaction with the external world
and with ourselves
A revitalisation of the tension between physis and techne
A radical change in our role as ethical agents
6
Physis and techne
Technology makes a revolution in the tools to acquire knowledge of the world
Intervening on Nature grants us epistemic access to it
Opening of new possibilities for the creation of artefacts
Pure science is not the privileged lieu of knowledge anymore
Technoscience: a noetic and poietic aspect on a par
7
THE HOMO POIETICUSIN THE E-NVIRONMENT
8
New environment, new ethics
Digital revolution creates poietically-enabling environment
A new ethical agent: homo poieticusMore than just faber and oeconomicus
A maker: of the situation he’s in, of the action he takes
Egopoietic, sociopoietic, ecopoietic projects
A new ethical approach: constructionist ethicsCopes with the poietic skills of the agent
Reduces ‘moral luck’
9
Constructionist ethics
• Homo poieticus creates new situations liable of moral judgment
• Agents are also evaluated for the process that led to the situation they are in
Situated action ethics
• Agents happen to be in some situation liable of moral judgement
• Agents are evaluated for the goodness or consequences of their actions.No evaluation of how agents got in the situation they are in
10
Floridi argues
• The digital dimension of the fourth revolution revitalise the tensions between physis and techne
• In the infosphere, man creates the situations he is in. We therefore need a concept of homo poeiticus and a constructionist ethics
Here I argue
• Tensions between physis and techne are revitalised because the fourth revolution is a technological revolution (rather than digital).
• The homo poieticus is not just the ethical agent, but also the technoscientist and the philosopher
11
THE HOMO POIETICUS:THE TECHNOSCIENTIST
12
From science to technoscience
The ‘Aristotelian’ scientist• Knowledge by passive
observation of Nature• Little, auxiliary role of
experimentation
• Science is episteme, it has noetic goals
The ‘Baconian’ scientist• Knowledge by active
interaction with Nature• Primary role of
experimentation: the scientist is a ‘maker’, science is ‘scientia operativa’
• Science is (also) techne, it has (also) poietic goals
13
Technoscientist as a maker
Making craftsE.g.: computers, nuclear weapons, medical devices …
14
Technoscientist as a maker
Making knowledge
Floridi’s constructionist epistemology
Knowledge is the designing and modelling of reality
We lost our privileged location in the physical and biological realms
(Copernican and Darwinian revolutions)
But we are still in a position to claim our centrality in the construction of knowledge of those realms
15
Technoscientist as a maker
Making knowledge through instruments
A ‘constructionist choir’ (Ihde, Bunge, Heidegger):
Instruments allow us to know beyond the macro world
Instrumental attitude justified by obtained ‘practical’ results (Ding an sich vs Ding für uns)
Both techne and episteme ‘reveal’ or ‘disclose’ some truth, the difference lying in what and how they reveal
16
THE HOMO POIETICUS:THE PHILOSOPHER
17
The philosopher as a maker
Making and using thought and ideas
Floridi: philosophy as conceptual engineeringNot just or only a logico-mathematical procedure
But poiesis of thoughts and ideas – conceptual constructionism
Deleuze & Guattari: philosophers create conceptsPhilosophy is not contemplation, reflection or communication
Philosophy finds new concepts that explain the world
As the world changes, so concepts do
18
ETHICS MEETS EPISTEMOLOGY?
19
Many virtues of the homo poieticus
Embodies many aspects of human ‘making’ activities:
Creation of situations liable to be morally assessed
Creation of crafts and knowledge
Creation of (philosophical) concepts
The homo poieticus can see technology
as knowledge and as creation of artefacts
20
Physis and techne reconciled
Techne is an opportunity for the agent
To better know and act upon the world around
To ask new questions with respect to ‘classical’ epistemology
21
From technologyto ethical evaluation
Ethical evaluation
‘Action of making’ or ‘Process of using’
The purpose of the technological artefactsmakes it liable to ethical evaluation
What ethical evaluation?New environments, new roles, new ethics
A constructionist ethics
22
Ethics meets epistemology
Questions and worries about technology depend onwhat we know about emergent spaces of possibilities
What to do depends on what we know
A constructionist epistemology for a constructionist ethics
23
TO SUM UP AND CONCLUDE
24
The homo poieticus:ethical agent, technoscientist and philosopher
The digital revolution urges us to rethinkthe role of the ethical agent and of the ethical theory
The homo poieticus and constructionist ethics
The digital technological revolution revitalisesthe tensions between physis and techne
The tension is solved through a homo poieticusthat creates crafts, knowledge and concepts
A constructionist ethics is supported bya constructionist epistemology.