Special to S&T Review

Technological ethical governance needs practical wisdom

  • CHEN Hua,, XIE Sudan
Expand
  • 1. Marxism School, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China;
    2. Research Base of Southern Medical University, Guangdong Research Center for Socialism with Chinese Characteristics in the New Era of Xi Jinping, Guangzhou 510515, China;
    3. Ethics Office of Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510280, China

Received date: 2022-08-11

  Revised date: 2022-09-15

  Online published: 2022-10-27

Supported by

 

Abstract

The combination of science and technology has expanded the multi-dimensional possibility of human action. In recent years, ethical events triggered by new technologies such as gene editing and artificial intelligence have pushed the ethical governance of science and technology from the background to the foreground. Based on the systematic exposition of the integration of the science and technology ethics and the emergence of China's science and technology ethics governance, this paper analyzes the reasons why the science and technology ethics governance needs practical wisdom as a practical activity and the ways how the practical wisdom guides the science and technology ethics governance. It is shown that the application of the modern science and technology requires "ethics first". The practical wisdom can deal with the conflict between "can proposition" and "should proposition" in the science and technology ethics, constantly balance the principles of the prevention and the initiative, judge the human well-being and clarify the responsibility of the science and technology ethics governance. The results show that the practical wisdom provides a specific guidance for the ethical governance of science and technology by balancing the abstract principles and the specific scenarios, grasping the ethical boundaries of the science and technology application and the scientific and technological risks. The practical wisdom is not the wisdom of a single subject, but the consensus of all the wisdom of the governance community. Therefore, we must build a scientific and technological ethics governance community.

Cite this article

CHEN Hua,, XIE Sudan . Technological ethical governance needs practical wisdom[J]. Science & Technology Review, 2022 , 40(18) : 5 -12 . DOI: 10.3981/j.issn.1000-7857.2022.18.001

References

[1] 于雪, 凌昀, 李伦. 新兴科技伦理治理的问题及其对策[J]. 科学与社会, 2021, 11(4): 51-65.
[2] 汉斯·约纳斯. 技术、 医学与伦理学[M]. 张荣, 译. 上海: 上海译文出版社, 2008: 24-32.
[3] 陈勇川. 回顾与展望: 我国生物医学研究伦理审查的发展趋势[J]. 医学与哲学, 2020, 41(15): 1-7.
[4] 崔会敏. 整体性治理: 超越新公共管理的治理理论[J]. 辽宁行政学院学报, 2011, 13(7): 20-22.
[5] 樊春良. 国家科技治理体系的理论构架与政策蕴含[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2022, 43(3): 3-23.
[6] 俞吾金. 从实用理性走向实践智慧[J]. 杭州师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2014, 36(3): 36-43.
[7] 亚里士多德. 尼各马可伦理学[M]. 廖申白, 译. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2003: 173.
[8] 杨国荣. 论实践智慧[J]. 中国社会科学, 2012(4): 4-22.
[9] 戈尔德·莱昂哈德. 人机冲突: 人类与智能世界如何共处[M]. 张尧然, 高艳梅, 译. 北京: 机械工业出版社, 2019: 106.
[10] 何家伟, 孟盼盼. 习近平关于科技伦理的“五论” [J]. 实事求是, 2020(3): 11-16.
[11] 维克多·弗兰克. 活出生命的意义[M]. 吕娜, 译. 北京: 华夏出版社, 2010.
[12] 乌尔里希·贝克. 风险社会: 新的现代性之路[M]. 张文杰, 何博闻, 译. 南京: 译林出版社, 2018: 27.
[13] Kant I. Grounding for the metaphysics of morals[M]. Ellington J W, trans. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1993: 38.
[14] 范瑞平. 科技伦理原则需要具体研究才能指导[J]. 中国医学伦理学, 2022, 35(5): 475-478.
[15] 万俊人. 理性认识科技伦理学的三个维度[N]. 光明日报, 2022-02-14(15).
[16] 田海平.“实践智慧” 与智慧的实践[J]. 中国社会科学, 2018(3): 4-25.
[17] 陈化, 马永慧. 寻找基因编辑技术的道德边界[J]. 伦理学研究, 2020(6): 117-124.
[18] 乌尔里希·贝克, 约翰内斯·威尔姆斯. 自由与资本主义[M]. 路国林, 译. 杭州: 浙江人民出版社, 2001: 118.
[19] 陈化, 马永慧. 基因-生殖工程应用中的风险问题与伦理治理——以生殖系基因编辑为例[J]. 工程研究-跨学科视野中的工程, 2020, 12(3): 233-240.
[20] 彭耀进, 李伟. 生命科技伦理问题与治理策略——以人-动物嵌合体研究为例[J]. 科技导报, 2020, 38(5): 42-49.
Outlines

/