Pak-Hang Wong

Responsible innovation for decent nonliberal peoples: a dilemma?

ABSTRACTIt is hard to disagree with the idea of responsible innovation (henceforth, RI), as it enables policy-makers, scientists, technology developers, and the public to better understand and respond to the social, ethical, and policy challenges raised by new and emerging technologies. RI has gained prominence in the policy agenda in Europe and the United States over the last few years. And, along with its rising importance in policy-making, there is also a burgeoning research literature on the topic. Given the historical context from which RI emerges, it should not be surprising that the current discourse on RI is predominantly based on liberal democratic values. Yet, the bias towards liberal democratic values will inevitably limit the discussion of RI, especially in the cases where liberal democratic values are not taken for granted. As such, there is an urgent need to return to the normative foundation of RI, and to explore the notion of ‘responsible innovation’ from nonliberal democratic perspectives...

The Asia-Pacific’s role in the emerging solar geoengineering debate

Increasing interest in climate engineering in recent years has led to calls by the international research community for international research collaboration as well as global public engagement. But making such collaboration a reality is challenging. Here, we report the summary of a 2016 workshop on the significance and challenges of international collaboration on climate engineering research with a focus on the Asia-Pacific region. Because of the region’s interest in benefits and risks of climate engineering, there is a potential synergy between impact research on anthropogenic global warming and that on solar radiation management. Local researchers in the region can help make progress toward better understanding of impacts of solar radiation management. These activities can be guided by an ad hoc Asia-Pacific working group on climate engineering, a voluntary expert network. The working group can foster regional conversations in a sustained manner while contributing to capacity building. An important theme in the regional conversation is to develop effective practices of dialogues in light of local backgrounds such as cultural traditions and past experiences of large-scale technology development. Our recommendation merely portrays one of several possible ways forward, and it is our hope to stimulate the debate in the region.

A Walzerian approach to ICTs and the good life

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce an interpretive approach to examining the relation between information and communication technologies (ICTs) and the good life, based on Michael Walzers view of (connected) social criticism.Design/methodology/approach – Through a discussion of Michael Walzers view of social criticism, an interpretive approach to normative analysis of ICTs and the good life is introduced. The paper also offers an additional argument for the indispensability of prudential appraisals of ICTs in normative analysis of ICTs and the good life, which in turn strengthens the basis for the Walzerian approach proposed in the paper.Findings – It is argued that an interpretive approach to normative analysis of ICTs and the good life, i.e. the Walzerian approach, is as viable as – if not superior to – a theory‐driven approach. It is also argued that actual appraisals of ICTs and the good life must be taken into account in the normative analysis.Originality/value – It is only recentl...

Well-Being in contemporary society

Chapter 1. Introduction-Well-Being in Contemporary Society Jelle de Boer, Jan-Willem van der Rijt, Johnny Hartz Soraker, Pak-Hang Wong and Philip Brey.- Chapter 2. Towards Consensus on Well-Being Timothy Taylor.- Chapter 3. Towards a Widely Acceptable Framework for the Study of Personal Well-Being Sam Wren-Lewis.- Chapter 4. Well-Being between Science and Philosophy Raffaele Rodogno.- Chapter 5. Improving the Health Care Sector with a Hapiness-Based Approach: The Case of the Happiness Route Laura Weiss, Sarah Kedzia, Aad Francissen and Gerben Westerhoff.- Chapter 6. Conflict, Commitment and Well-Being Rixar Arlegi and Miriam Teschl.- Chapter 7. Can Technology make us Happy?: Ethics, Spectators Happiness and the Value of Achievement Andreas Spahn.- Chapter 8. A Biomedical Shortcut to (Fraudulent) Happiness? An Analysis of the Notions of Well-Being and Authenticity Underlying Objections to Mood Enhancement Birgit Beck and Barbara Stroop.- Chapter 9. Increasing Societal Well-Being through Enhanced Empathy using Computer Games Judith Annett and Stefan Berglund.- Chapter 10. Well-Being, Happiness and Sustainability Bengt Brulde.- Chapter 11. The Political Pursuit of Happiness: A Popperian Perspective on Layards Happiness Policy Aloys Prinz and Bjorn Bunger.- Chapter 12. Measuring Quality of Life - and Idea Whose Times has Come? Agenda-Settings Dynamics in Britain and the European Union Ian Bache.- Chapter 13. The Political Turn towards Happiness Jan-Willem van der Rijt.

Maintenance Required: The Ethics of Geoengineering and Post-Implementation Scenarios

The ethics of geoengineering has gained momentum in recent academic debate. The current debates, however, is typically framed in terms of (i) the first-order question about the moral permissibility of geoengineering, and (ii) the second-order question about the distributive and compensatory issues associated with geoengineering. Both (i) and (ii) are central to decision-making about geoengineering, but they have not cover all ethical issues related to geoengineering. I argue that a preoccupation with (i) and (ii) may lead to an oversight of post-implementation scenarios (PISs), which introduce different ethical issues relevant to decision-making on geoengineering. More specifically, I use the requirement of maintenance for geoengineering as an example to draw attention to PISs, and to illustrate the limit of the existing discussion in the ethics of geoengineering.

Technology, Recommendation and Design: On Being a ‘Paternalistic’ Philosopher

Philosophers have talked to each other about moral issues concerning technology, but few of them have talked about issues of technology and the good life, and even fewer have talked about technology and the good life with the public in the form of recommendation. In effect, recommendations for various technologies are often left to technologists and gurus. Given the potential benefits of informing the public on their impacts on the good life, however, this is a curious state of affairs. In the present paper, I will examine why philosophers are seemingly reluctant to offer recommendations to the public. While there are many reasons for philosophers to refrain from offering recommendations, I shall focus on a specific normative reason. More specifically, it appears that, according to a particular definition, offering recommendations can be viewed as paternalistic, and therefore is prima facie wrong to do so. I will provide an argument to show that the worry about paternalism is unfounded, because a form of paternalism engendered by technology is inevitable. Given the inevitability of paternalism, I note that philosophers should accept the duty to offer recommendations to the public. I will then briefly turn to design ethics, which has reconceptualised the role of philosophers and, in my mind, fitted well with the inevitability of paternalism. Finally, I shall argue that design ethics has to be supplemented by the practice of recommendation if it is to sustain its objective.