Handbook of Ethics 27

Book Review Chapter 27

Book: Intercultural Information Ethics

Library Reference: None

Amazon Reference: http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Information-Computer-Ethics/dp/0471799599/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239782484&sr=8-1

Quote:“Digital information technology has at first sight changed the horizon of human thinking and action in such a way that we have to deal with many problems for which classic ethical theories do not have only any answers but they cannot even provide a sufficient basis to deal with them.”

Learning expectation:

I expect learn the issues and discussion about intercultural information ethics

Review:

Our present life-world is shaped by information technology. The Oxford philosopher Luciano Floridi has coined the term “infosphere” to capture this point (Floridi 1999). I use instead the term digital ontology in the sense that this world view of the digital embraces today all dimensions of our being-in-the-world (Capurro 2001). This predominant digital world view is not the cyberspace or “the new home of mind” proclaimed by John Perry Barlow in 1996 (Barlow 1996) but the intersection of the digital with the ecological, political, economic, and cultural spheres. Intercultural information ethics addresses questions concerning these intersections such as: How far is the Internet changing local cultural values and traditional ways of life? How far do these changes affect the life and culture of future societies in a global and local sense? Put another way, how far do traditional cultures and their moral values communicate and transform themselves under the impact of the digital “infosphere” in general and of the Internet in particular? In other words, intercultural information ethics can be conceived as a field of research where moral questions of the “infosphere” are reflected in a comparative manner on the basis of different cultural traditions. The Internet has become a challenge not only to international but also to intercultural information ethics as I will show in the second part of this paper. But, indeed, intercultural information ethics suggests a paradigm shift not only within traditional (Western) ethics but also within (Western) philosophy itself to which I will first briefly refer.
This dialogue is thus not only an inner one but also an intercultural and finally a transcultural one that goes beyond the local tradition of Western philosophy as well as beyond any mono-cultural foundation of philosophy but remaining attached to it at the same time in the different voices that articulate it. When Heidegger states that we can only get into a historical or creative dialogue with the original Greek experience, “we” is then of course not restricted to Europeans who must overcome their own tradition starting with an inner-cultural dialogue. This dialogue changes the meaning of the word “we” that is to say, the matter of philosophy.

What I have learned:

I have learned that there are at least three major global or spherical projects in European history. The first one is the globalisation of reason in Greek philosophy. Reason conceives itself – from Aristotle until Hegel – as global thinking that goes beyond nature into the realm of the divine as the eternal, infinite or metaphysical sphere. Such a sphere bursts with the rise of modern science. Metaphysical claims are criticised by modern empirical science. In this unequal fight, David, modern empirical science, is the winner over the metaphysics of Goliath. The second globalisation is the earthly one. It begins in Europe in the 15th Century and bursts in the 20th Century. The idea of a spherical earth and the attempts to circumnavigate it are indeed older, but the totalitarian ambitions of modern subjectivity are paid off, at least for a while. The third globalisation is the digital one with predecessors in the late middle Ages as well as in Modernity. Today we are confronted with the digital formatting of mankind. The digital globalisation not only reinforces and expands upon the divide between the digital haves and have-nots but also makes more explicit and even deepens existing inequalities.

Integrative question:
1. What is virtual reality?
2. What is computer simulation?
3. What does VR mean?
4. What is behavior in single-user VR?
5. What is virtual child pornography?