Toward an ethical turn of the technology
why Hans Jonas is not a technophobic
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-3173.2022.v45n2.p191Keywords:
Technophobia, Hans Jonas, Ethical turn, Responsibility, Heuristic of fearAbstract
The purpose of this article is to counter against the accusation of technophobic, wrongly directed to Hans Jonas, his proposal for an ethical turn of technology, whose bases would be on the ethical capacity to impose restraint on the utopian advance of technical progress, something that leads to the ethics of responsibility to the controversial concept of “heuristic of fear”. To do so, we started from an examination of the Jonasian project of a philosophy of technology, whose third perspective would be valuable, which is the one he developed best. From there, we will analyze what would be the value of technology from the point of view of life (in its four spheres: present and future, human and extra-human) and then strategically analyze the position of Gerard Lebrun for whom Jonas should be placed among technophobic philosophers. Our aim, in this case, is to demonstrate the inconsistency of such an interpretation, precisely because the French thinker with an important presence in Brazil, confuses the proposal of ethical reorientation (in the sense of a power from inside of the technique) with the imposition of an external power, of a paralyzing type.
Downloads
References
ACHTERHUIS, H. La responsabilité entre la crainte et l'utopie. In: HOTTOIS, Gilbert; PINSART, Marie-Geneviève. Hans Jonas, nature et responsabilité. Paris: Vrin, 1993. p. 37-47.
FROGNEUX, N. O medo como virtude d substituição. In: NOVAES, A. Ensaios sobre o medo. São Paulo: Senac São Paulo; Sesc SP, 2007. p. 187-207.
GREISCH, J. «L’heuristique de la peur» ou qui a peur de Hans Jonas? In: DILLENS, Anne-Marie (dir.). La peur. Émotion, passion, raison. Bruxelles: Presses de l’Université Saint-Louis, 2006. p. 115-141.
GUDYNAS, Eduardo. Direitos da natureza. Ética biocêntrica e políticas ambientais. Tradução de Igor Ojeda. São Paulo: Elefante, 2019.
HÉBERT, Geneviève. La bonne crainte. Études, p. 67-70, jan. 1997.
JONAS, Hans. Técnica, medicina e ética. Sobre a prática do princípio responsabilidade. Tradução do Grupo de trabalho Hans Jonas da ANPOF. São Paulo: Paulus, 2013 (Col. Ethos).
LEBRUN, G. Sobre a tecnofobia. In: LEBRUN, G. A filosofia e sua história. Organização de Carlos Alberto Ribeiro de Moura, Maria Lúcia M. O. Cacciola e Marta Kawano. São Paulo: Cosac Naify, 2006. p. 481-508.
LISBOA, M. V. Medo. In: OLIVEIRA, J.; POMMIER, E. Vocabulário Hans Jonas. Caxias do Sul: EDUCS, 2019.
OLIVEIRA, J. Negação e poder: do desafio do niilismo ao perigo da tecnologia. Caixas do Sul: EDUCS, 2018.
OLIVEIRA, J. R. Le statut heuristique de la crainte dans la réflexion éthique de Hans Jonas. Alter Revue de Phénomenologie, v. 22, p. 195-209, 2014.
OLIVEIRA, J. R. Niilismo e tecnologia. Filosofia Unisinos, São Leopoldo-RS, v. 21, p. 73-78, 2020.
SÉRIS, J.-P. La Technique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1994.
SÈVE, Bernard. Hans Jonas et l’ethique de la responsabilité. Revue Espri, Paris, n. 165, p. 72- 88, out. 1990.
SÈVE, Bernard. O medo como procedimento heurístico e como instrumento de persuasão em Hans Jonas. Tradução de Marcelo Gomes. In: NOVAIS, Adauto (org.). Ensaios sobre o medo. São Paulo: Senac São Paulo; Sesc, 2007.
ZAFRANI, Avishag. Le défi du nihilisme. Ernest Bloch et Hans Jonas. Paris: Hermann, 2014. (Col. Philosophie).
Recebido: 06/6/2021 - Aceito: 19/9/2021
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 TRANS/FORM/AÇÃO: Revista de Filosofia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open access article published under a Creative Commons license.