3 ms·
> Technology is morally neutral This argument needs to stop being used. Developed knowingly, a race-condition-full Therac-25 machine is objectively bad and a s
by yzmtf2008 7y ago
> Technology is morally neutral
This argument needs to stop being used. Developed knowingly, a race-condition-full Therac-25 machine is objectively bad and a side-effect-free cancer cure is objectively good. It's along the same lines of "guns don't kill people, people kill people". It is a gross simplification of morality and ethical theories but nonetheless touted by people on the internet way too often. If anything it highlights the need for an ethics class as a requirement for any engineering degree.
- kohtatsu 7y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 Wow..
- philwelch 7y ago> Developed knowingly, a race-condition-full Therac-25 machine is objectively bad You've gone and proven my point with that "developed knowingly" disclaimer, because rather than merely a technology, you're describing a deceptive and harmful act committed by a human being.
- yzmtf2008 7y agoKnowingly is not a disclaimer. Whether the developer intended it doesn’t change it’s an immoral technology if ever used. It is moreover absolutely not a proof or excuse for moral relativism.
- philwelch 7y agoI'm not advocating any sort of moral relativism. The act of intentionally building faulty medical equipment is morally wrong. Even the act of negligently building faulty medical equipment is morally wrong. But the faulty medical equipment itself is an inanimate object and it's a category mistake to ascribe moral judgment to it. > Whether the developer intended it doesn’t change it’s an immoral technology if ever used. Knowingly or negligently using unsafe medical equipment to treat patients is morally wrong, yes. You're again describing an act performed by a person and not the technology itself.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]