“外在主义”抑或“内在主义”:国外科技伦理治理研究的两条进路

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (6665 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract In the academic shift from“moral self-regulation”to“ethical regulation”,the ethical governance of science and technology has been paid close attention by academics,and the two parallel research paths of“externalism”and“internalism”have gradually been formed.The“externalism”approach denies that technological artifacts are moral subjects,advocates the adoption of high-level legislation led by public institutions,takes expert trust as the value premise,and takes risk prevention as the key issue to guide the ethical practice of science and technology development.The“internalism”approach believes that technological artifacts can play a value-led role as moral agents in specific contexts,and advocates the integration of ethical principles into the design and application of technological artifacts,relying on industry associations to set dynamic standards and engage the public to promote ethical practices.Although the two approaches are controversial in terms of philosophical foundations,subjects of governance,modes of governance,and means of governance,the inter-constitutive nature of their research objects and the complementary nature of their practical functions provide the possibility of coupling between them.Domestic academics should go beyond the research divisions of“externalism”and“internalism”,synthesize the views of the two research paths,and promote the development of research and practice of ethical governance of science and technology in China through the construction of a synergistic and co-governance main framework,the formation of a dynamically adapted governance mode,and the adoption of parallel-driven governance means.

Key words： Ethics of science and technology Governance Externalism Internalism

Received: 18 September 2024

PACS:

B829

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Yang Jianguo
	Hu Ying

Cite this article:

Yang Jianguo,Hu Ying. “Externalism”or“Internalism”:Two Paths of Research on Ethical Governance of Science and Technology in Foreign Countries[J]. , 2025, 6(7): 151-158.

URL:

http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/EN/ OR http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/EN/Y2025/V6/I7/151

[1]CATH C,WACHTER S,MITTELSTADT B,et al.Artificial intelligence and the‘good society’:The US,EU,and UK approach[J].Science and Engineering Ethics,2018,24:505-528.
[2]谢瑜,王潇毅.人工智能情感的伦理风险及其应对[J].伦理学研究,2024(1):132-140.
[3]彭耀进,周琪.应对生物技术变革与伦理新挑战的中国方略[J].中国科学院院刊,2021,36(11):1288-1297.
[4]鲁晓,王前.科技伦理治理中“科技”与“伦理”的深度融合问题[J].科学学研究,2023,41(11):1928-1931.
[5]张卫,王前.论技术伦理学的内在研究进路[J].科学技术哲学研究,2012(3):46-50.
[6]VERBEEK P.Materializing morality:Design ethics and technological mediation[J].Science,Technology & Human Values,2006,31(3):361-380.
[7]约翰·杜威.经验与自然[M].傅统先,译.北京:商务印书馆,2017:11-13.
[8]唐代兴.善抑或恶:人工智能的根本伦理问题[J].人文杂志,2022(6):76-87.
[9]DE MICCO F,SCENDONI R.Three different currents of thought to conceive justice:Legal,and medical ethics reflections[J].Philosophies,2024,9(3):61.
[10]LANDEWEERD L,TOWNEND D,MESMAN J,et al.Reflections on different governance styles in regulating science:A contribution to‘Responsible Research and Innovation’[J].Life sciences,Society and Policy,2015(11):1-22.
[11]ROCO C.Progress in governance of converging technologies integrated from the nanoscale[J].Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,2006,1093(1):1-23.
[12]郭喨,张学义.“专家信任”及其重建策略:一项实证研究[J].自然辩证法通讯,2017,39(4):82-92.
[13]安东尼·吉登斯.现代性的后果[M].南京:译林出版社.2011.
[14]宋应登,霍竹,邓益志.中国科技伦理治理的问题挑战及对策建议[J].科学学研究,2024,42(8):1569-1576,1595.
[15]WEINGART P,JOUBERT M,CONNOWAY K.Public engagement with science:Origins,motives and impact in academic literature and science policy[J].PloS One,2021,16(7):e0254201.
[16]维贝克.将技术道德化:理解与设计物的道德[M].闫宏秀,杨庆峰,译.上海:上海交通大学出版社.2016.
[17]殷杰.生成式人工智能的主体性问题[J].中国社会科学,2024(8):124-145,207.
[18]COLLINS H,WEINEL M,EVANS R.The politics and policy of the Third Wave:New technologies and society[J].Critical Policy Studies,2010,4(2):185-201.
[19]BELL R L,LEDERMAN N G.Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues[J].Science Education,2003,87(3):352-377.
[20]ZHANG D,LIE K.Ethical issues in human germline gene editing:A perspective from China[J].Monash Bioethics Review,2018(36):23-35.
[21]VAN I,VERBEEK P.Ethics and engineering design[J].Science,Technology,& Human Values,2006,31(3):223-236.
[22]RAVETZ I R.What is post-normal science[J].Futures-the Journal of Forecasting Planning and Policy,1999,31(7):647-654.
[23]FUNTOWICZ O,RAVETZ R.Science for the post-normal age[J].Futures,1993,25(7):739-755.
[24]杨博文,孙永军.理性赋能与向善赋权:科技伦理风险预警与敏捷治理体系的建构进路[J].科学技术哲学研究,2023,40(4):122-128.
[25]MORROW R.When technologies makes good people do bad things:Another argument against the value-neutrality of technologies[J].Science and Engineering Ethics,2014(20):329-343.
[26]FERRETTI T.An Institutionalist approach to AI ethics:Justifying the priority of government regulation over self-regulation[J].Moral Philosophy and Politics.2022,9(2):239-265.
[27]张卫.人工智能伦理的两条进路及其关系[J].云南社会科学,2021(5):21-27,185.
[28]刘湘丽,肖红军.软法范式的人工智能伦理监管:日本制度探析[J].现代日本经济,2023,42(4):28-44.
[29]総務省情報通信政策研究所.AI利活用原則案[EB/OL].(2018-07-31)[2025-02-15].https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/tyousakai/humanai/4kai/siryo1.pdf.
[30]AI原則の実践の在り方に関する検討会.我が国のAIガバナンスの在り方Ver.1.1[EB/OL].(2021-07-09)[2025-02-15].https://www.meti.go.jp/shingikai/mono_info_service/ai_shakai_jisso/pdf/20210709_1.pdf.