The crisis of individual responsibility in technological societies

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14422/pen.v81.i314.y2025.009

Keywords:

ethics, technology, cybernetics, complex systems, responsibility

Abstract

Until the publication of The Principle of Responsibility (1979), most Western ethical systems focused on the exclusively intersubjective nature of actions and paid no attention to the way in which those actions related to the environment. The reason for this is that the environment had been conceived as something completely independent from actions taken or, at least, as a reality endowed with a determined and easily predictable behavior. The development of technology and the knowledge of complex systems have put that notion of the environment under strain, which has altered the type of ethical responsibility of certain actions. This article explains the way in which non-trivial systems challenge Hans Jonas’ notion of responsibility through a new understanding of responsibility suitable to understand the type of interconnection (subjective and objective) characteristic of complex systems.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Allinson, R. E. (1999). «The epistemological and ethical basis of risk assessment in advanced technological systems: The lesson of the Challenger» en: International Journal of Technology Management 17 (1-2), pp. 54-74.

Anders, G. (1961). Off Limits für das Gewissen. Berlin: Rowohlt.

Bertalanffy, L. von (2014). Teoría general de los sistemas. Fundamentos, desarrollo, aplicaciones. México D.F: Fondo de cultura Económica.

Bodde, D. L. (2014). «Ethics and the allocation of risk in engineering design», en: International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering, Chicago 2014. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893432

Braidotti, R. (2018). «Affirmative ethics, posthuman subjectivity, and intimate scholarship: A conversation with Rosi Braidotti» en: Advances in Research on Teaching 31, pp. 179-188. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S1479-368720180000031014

Braidotti, R. (2015). Lo Posthumano. Barcelona: Gedisa.

Brannigan, V. M. (2005). «Teaching ethics in the engineering design process: A legal scholar’s view» en: IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine 47 (1), pp. 146-151. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MAP.2005.1436255

Butler, J. (2007). El género en disputa. Barcelona: Paidós Ibérica.

Chastel, A. (1982). Arte y humanismo en Florencia en la época de Lorenzo el Magnífico. Madrid: Cátedra.

Collins, F. (1973). «Responsibility of engineers for the uses and effects of technology. The Special Responsibility of Engineers», en Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 196 (10), pp. 448-450. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1973.tb21177.x

De Oliveira, J. R. (2015). «A técnica como poder e o poder da técnica: Entre Hans Jonas e Andrew Feenberg» en: Revista de Filosofia: Aurora 27 (40), pp. 143-166. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7213/aurora.27.040.DS06

Deleuze, G. (2014). El poder. Curso sobre Deleuze, Tomo II. Buenos Aires: Cactus.

Deleuze, G. (1989). El Pliegue. Leibniz y el Barroco. Barcelona: Paidós.

Deleuze, G. y Guattari, F. (2004). Mil mesetas. Capitalismo y esquizofrenia. Valencia: Pre- Textos.

Della Mirandola, G. P. (1984). De la dignidad del hombre. Madrid: Editorial Nacional.

Dos Santos, A. C. y Souza, K. K. M. (2018). «Técnica e ética ambiental: um debate entre Jonas e Larrère e Larrère» en: Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente 45, pp. 105-116. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/dma.v45i0.50627

Dupuy, J. P. (1999). El pánico. Barcelona: Gedisa.

Ellul, J. (2003). La edad de la técnica. Barcelona: Octaedro.

Foerster, H. von (2003). Understanding Understanding: Essays on Cybernetics and Cognition. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Foerster, H. von (1991). Las semillas de la cibernética. Barcelona: Gedisa.

Galbraith, J. K. (1984). El nuevo Estado industrial. Madrid: Ariel.

Cao, G. (2013). «A paradox between technological autonomy and ethical heteronomy of philosophy of technology: Social control system» en: International Journal of Technoethics 4 (1), pp. 52-66. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jte.2013010105

García Bacca, J. D. (2006). Ciencia, Técnica, Historia y Filosofía. Barcelona: Anthropos.

García Bacca, J. D. (1987). Elogio de la Técnica. Barcelona: Anthropos.

Gernand, J. M. (2015). «Educating engineering students on probabilistic risk: Effects on the perception of ethics, professional responsibility, and personal agency», en: American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ed.), International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Proceedings, ASME, Houston, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2015-53055

Heidegger, M. (2007). Filosofía, ciencia y técnica. Santiago de Chile: Editorial universitaria.

Hillerbrand, R. (2018). «Why affordable clean energy is not enough. A capability perspective on the sustainable development goals» en: Sustainability (Switzerland), 10 (7), 2485. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su10072485

Hunyadi, M. (2010). «The Imagination in Charge» en: NanoEthics 4 (3), pp. 199-204. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11569-010-0104-9

Jonas, H. (1995). El principio de responsabilidad. Ensayo de una ética para la civilización tecnológica. Barcelona: Herder.

Kant, I. (2005). Crítica del juicio. Buenos Aires: Losada.

Kaczynski, T. (2016). Anti-Tech Revolution: Why and How. Chicago: Fitch & Madison Publishers.

Köhler, A. R. (2013). «Material Scarcity: A Reason for Responsibility in Technology Development and Product Design» en: Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (3), pp. 1165-1179. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-012-9401-8

Knowles, S. (2014). «Engineering Risk and Disaster: Disaster-STS and the American History of Technology» en: Engineering Studies 6 (3), pp. 227-248. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19378629.2014.967697

Larrère, C. y Larrère, R. (1997). Du bon usage de la nature: pour une philosophie de l’environnement. París: Aubier.

Lévi-Strauss, C. (2003). Las estructuras elementales del parentesco, Paidós Ibérica, Barcelona 1969; Derrida, J., De la gramatología. Buenos Aires: Siglo Veintiuno.

Martínez Gallego, M. A. (2019). «La fundamentación mate rial de la ética en Hans Jonas y Max Scheler. Dos respuestas a Kant desde el siglo XX» en: Pensamiento 75 (283), pp. 269- 287. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14422/pen.v75.i283.y2019.014

Mitcham, C. (1989). ¿Qué es filosofía de la tecnología?. Barcelona: Anthropos.

Moratalla, A. D. (2019). « Cuidado y responsabilidad: De Hans Jonas a Carol Gilligan» en: Pensamiento 75 (283), pp. 357-373. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14422/pen.v75.i283.y2019.019

Mumford, L. (2016). El pentágono del poder. El mito de la máquina vol. 2. Logroño: Pepitas de calabaza.

Mumford L. (1977). Técnica y Civilización. Madrid: Alianza.

Ortega y Gasset, J. (2014). Meditación de la técnica. Madrid: Alianza.

Sennett, R. (2019). Construir y habitar. Ética para la ciudad. Barcelona: Anagrama.

Sennett, R. (2012). Juntos. Rituales, placeres y política de cooperación,. Barcelona: Anagrama.

Sennett, R. (2009). El artesano. Barcelona: Anagrama.

Skolimowsky, H. (1948). «Freedom, Responsibility and the Information Society» en: Vital Speeches 50 (16), pp. 493-497.

Skirpan, M., Yeh, T. y Fiesler, C. (2018). «What’s at stake: Characterizing risk perceptions of emerging technologies» en: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montréal. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173644

Slolterdijk, P. (2011). Sin Salvación. Tras las huellas de Heidegger. Madrid: Akal.

Zhou, C., Otrel-Cass, K. y Børsen, T. (2015). «Integrating ethics into engineering education», en: Sundar Sethy, S. (ed.), Contemporary Ethical Issues in Engineering, IGI Global Publishers, Aalborg, pp. 159-173. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-8130-9.ch012

Downloads

Published

2025-07-18

Issue

Section

Estudios, textos, notas y comentarios

How to Cite

The crisis of individual responsibility in technological societies. (2025). Pensamiento. Revista De Investigación E Información Filosófica, 81(314), 457-481. https://doi.org/10.14422/pen.v81.i314.y2025.009