NBIC-Convergence and Technoethics

Abstract

Technoethics is a new, but rapidly developing field of ethical reflection of technoscience. It can claim to unite the various ethical projections of the science and technology development in a common approach. One of the starting points of understanding this role of technoethics may be NBIC-convergence. The ethical dimensions of the NBIC-projects is represented in these sub-areas of applied ethics as a nanoethics, bioethics, neuroethics and ICT ethics. In this article particular attention is paid to the biomedical field, which is a prime example of innovative high technology, as well as the interaction of different types of ethics.

The Human Encounter With New Technogenic Threats

“…The results of the information engineering and technology development are accompanied by euphoria in the mass consciousness, the content of which is the absolute belief that innovative technologies can solve all problems of social life. However, a philosophical analysis of the human existence prospects in the new social conditions, actively presented by Russian and Western researchers (Grebenshchikova, 2016;Felt, Schumann, Schwarz, & Strassnig, 2014;Fuller, 2009), allows us to draw a conclusion about a peculiar perversity of anthropological expectations, which is typical for any development: it is always accompanied by diseases of growth, the emergence of new risk factors that initiate negative consequences and require non-standard solutions (Shushpanova, 2018;Strand & Kaiser, 2015). The scientific community is alarmed to note the growing negative attitude towards IT innovations on the part of psychologists, medics, sociologists, teachers and other scientists, who study the effects of the new digital environment on people and state the transformation of adaptation mechanisms (Asmolov & Asmolov, 2019, Tutton, 2011.…”

Society. Personality. Technologies: Social Paradoxes of Industry 4.0

“…Issues, such as virtual reality in context of Industry 4.0 (Kovar, Mouralova, Ksica, Kroupa, Andrs & Hadas, 2016) [5], moral and ethical aspects of behaviour in virtual networks (Kinnunen, Lindeman, & Verkasalo, 2016) [6], dangers of social networking with an emphasis on gender aspects (Brooks & Longstreet, 2015) [7], effect analysis of Industry 4.0 to higher education (Baygin, Yetis, Karakose & Akin, 2016) [8], standardisation of communication of industrial networks in Industry 4.0 (Halenar, Juhasova & Juhas, 2016) [9], technoethics (Grebenshchikova, 2016) and humanitarian expert assessment of technosciences (Aseeva, 2016) [10,11], new values of the society (Kamensky, 2016) [12], the new di gital Industry 4.0 technological order in the context of the complexity paradigm (Roblek, Meško & Krapež, 2016) [13], are being researched by foreign scholars.…”

The Model of Bioethics as “Semiotic Attractors” for Diagnosing Innovative Strategies of Training Specialists for NBICS-Technologies Niche

“…But when it hits the target it disintegrates into multiple parts-shells, each of which moves by its own trajectory to the new targets and as a result it changes all the socio-cultural landscape radically and irreversibly. The given artillery metaphor allows if not understanding but feeling the power of self-organizing technologies' influence on routine life of human, because it is corporeality and conscience of the very human that is "at the gunsight" [5]. Thus, comprehension of inter-relation of the procedures turns into extremely important point.…”

“…Thus, comprehension of inter-relation of the procedures turns into extremely important point. The procedures are: 1) a humanitarian review of consequences of NBICS-technologies' implementation [5]; 2) an ethical review of experiments with participation of human beings in the course of those technologies elaboration [6][7]; 3) a socio-cultural review of humanitarian education's content aimed at specialists prepared for these technologies [8][9][10][11][12][13]. The problem of the knowledge management related to NBICStechnologies stimulates a convergent nature of all creations and its implementations.…”

“…It makes "the firing zone" narrow and resulted in shaping of either some abstract anthropological image for all technologies' subjects or divided images of the ones under test and the testing ones. Solution of this question is up to bioethics, because its bio-medical industry and social institutions of health care became the primary "consumers" of NBICS-technologies [5,[14][15][16][17].…”