Retooling Techno-Moral Scenarios. A Revisited Technique for Exploring Alternative Regimes of Responsibility for Human Enhancement

Abstract

The techno-moral scenarios (TMS) approach has been developed to explore the interplay between technology, society and morality. Focused on new and emerging sciences and technologies, techno-moral scenarios can be used to inform and enhance public deliberation on the desirability of socio-technical trajectories. The article presents an attempt to hybridise this scenario tool, complementing the focus on ethics with an explicit acknowledgement of the multiple meanings of responsibility and of the plurality of its regimes, i.e. the institutional arrangements presiding over the assumption and assignment of responsibilities. We call this integrated technique 'rTMS' to stress the continuity with the original technique and, at the same time, to highlight the additional element we aim to develop: responsibility. The article describes this approach and illustrates a loosely standardised procedure that can be used to organise and conduct public engagement workshops based on rTMS.

Anticipation and modal power: Opening up and closing down the momentum of sociotechnical systems

“…In contrast to technocratic uses of futures, the operationalization of these anticipatory techniques seeks to broaden the range of concerns considered by nurturing critical reflective capabilities (e.g. Arnaldi, 2018;Betten et al, 2018;Rip & Kulve, 2008;Swierstra et al, 2009). For instance, Selin (2011) operationalizes futures scenarios to explore alternative impacts of nanotechnologies, Lehoux et al (2020) to stimulate moral imagination in health technology, and Withycombe Keeler et al (2019) to promote 'emancipatory' capabilities and sustainable presents.…”

Nanoethics: Countries With Nanotechnological Development

“…There are several norms that characterize the word or ethical application, which focus attention on values (Campillo Vélez y Zuleta Salas 2014; Demir 2011). However, there are still debates due to the moral and philosophical controversy that the word represents, mainly, the technological framework (Arnaldi 2018;Baserer, Baserer, y Akcan 2016). Another possible description of this, so famous word, could be visualized from the awareness of man about his actions related to the damage that could be done by the nature of the planet where we find our short, medium or long term.…”

Responsibility through Anticipation? The ‘Future Talk’ and the Quest for Plausibility in the Governance of Emerging Technologies

“…On the one hand, (a) in exploratory product-centred anticipations, the FSs-alternative socio-technical [40] or techno-moral scenarios [5,82]-might illuminate diverse potential socio-technical and/or techno-moral (re)configurations that might co-evolve from a NEST development (e.g., discovering potential risks, positive outcomes, uses, opportunities, drawbacks). This includes both potential 'hard' (e.g., environmental and health risks) and/or 'soft' impacts (e.g., power and social relations, understandings, culture, values, morality) (see [22,83]).…”

“…The previous assessment compels the ethicist(s) (and perhaps other actors) to consider FS as a scenario that should be avoided or to which we must adapt (e.g., creating strategies such as new privacy laws) The previous assessment compels the ethicist (and perhaps other actors) to design a new organisation of society with the ability to address FS (both product-based and especially procedural). This is so because these exercises, in addition to the shared methodological call for a 'reality check' [5,22,82,83,91,117,119] (thus minimising overly speculative FSs), collectively diversify the FSs considered and amplify the possibilities taken into account by recognising the uncertainty inherent to socio-technical and/ or techno-moral co-evolution processes (against step 2b, Table 3). This diversification, especially when divergent but plausible scenarios come into play, helps to highlight that there is no such thing as a fixed future.…”